/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>51697539
fuck aave
town hall and eth guys but I will watch some of the other stuff

>no Sergey
i sleep

>>51697574
elaborate on AAVE

>>51697601
no.

ef talks could be interesting, let's see if the larps are true

shitcoin.. >>51697644

balaji putting trucks on a blockchain

140 people watching on youtube
we're early af

>>51700109
Hey! I have 4 dollars of that! I used to have 50 but i spent it on hoi4 dlc.

>>51700109
scamcon

>>51700109
this was a thousand dollars a seat at one point?

Where the duck is Ari?

>>51700109
lol

>>51697539
>SmartCon
>They're smart
>It's a con

>>51700109
Kek

CURRENT SPEAKER IS BAD
HE STUTTERED ONCE
CHAINLINK IS OVERRRRR

It's over bros, LINK is not new tech, a hidden gem, or a coming 10-100x. LINK is mainstream and is in Twitter roasties bios. It’s a corporate entity now, so Sergey has to dump another 750k LINK to hire talent managers and diversity officers. LINK hasn’t been the biz token for over 2 years now. Just sell anons... i-i-iit’s over. It was a good ride.

>>51700109
Well that's at 8AM right? No one's going to be there.

when do we get presentations I don't care about coding

>>51700706
I don't think we're getting proper presentations today, just prerecorded bullshit.

kek i'm just laughing at these idiots whilst shorting LUNC!

they're not gonna stream ccip or deco are they

>>51701222
nope, only prerecorded shit on the stream today

this dude from Gartner has mentioned DECO specifically like 3 times now along with interoperability

>>51701222
nope
https://twitter.com/SergeysSon/status/1575493634384068610

>>51701312
$777.77 Chainlink labs definitely lurks here

>>51701381
no shit newfag

fuck not the respect the pamp guy

https://twitter.com/W1ttelsbacher/status/1575487871917600780

>>51701381
They don’t just lurk here, they monitor this site to prevent insiders from dropping crumbs. This is why the discussions here are generally sparse beyond big events like this.

>>51701451
if they actually manage to make undercollateralized lending work in crypto DeFi will skyrocket

>>51701261
>>51701312
>>51701381
>>51701451
why aren't they showing this, it looks great

I'm at work with mega shit internet the agenda isn't loading fuuu can someone post a compressed screenshot? I wanna hear Jonny talk and Sergey if he's speaking again

https://twitter.com/SergeysSon/status/1575495909495869440

>>51701562
they'll upload in the coming days/weeks, now only for SmartCon attendees

basically pay up and show up my dear NEET friend

To be honest DECO seems like one of the biggest pieces to unlock basically everything but at the same time it won't be a money maker for Chainlink. But it's gonna be like Google Authenticator, they don't really make money off that i guess but it's just another piece of the whole domination picture

>>51701523
Semi-shill here, fyi this is also what Oasis is doing with their Sapphire paratime. It's a shame that L1 is so unpopular. I hope they make it since I hold a sizeable bag.

>>51701663
>it won't be a money maker for Chainlink
DECO is a service which will generate fees ie. income for DONs. Or am I mistaken?

>>51701569
>deco renting
>pay in eth
this is beautiful
>>51701591
guess I'll have to consider bathing and going next year

>>51701663
what if i told you, you'll need to pay for every txn thats made to access DECO?

BITOCONNNNNNNNNNNECTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

HEY
HEY
HEY

>>51701739
This was definitely the vibes from yesterday's opening haha.

>>51699888
kekd and checked

Ed's presentation at 11:40 will be streamed apparently. https://twitter.com/arbitrum/status/1575462899987800064

>>51701736
>>51701701
I would respond by telling you that that's unrealistic because of this... >>51701381
It seems to be more of an software infrastructure play, of course branded powered and secured by Chainlink but essentially looks like a local program that will prove something locally and then confirm to the DON. It will hugely increase the possibilities and the anonymous data will go to DONs to confirm an event/information. But imagine it like this: Chainlink is Amazon, and people don't have post boxes yet so Amazon builds them for them.

>>51701568
Honestly not even gonna bother with the screenshot. All the important in-person talks aren't being livestreamed today, the stream is for pre-recorded literally whos. Your best bet is twitter for people attending to post photographs of slides.

Holy shit a BSN presentation

Tiger mommy?

>>51701866
>essentially looks like a local program that will prove something locally and then confirm to the DON.
You're right, that is what it looks like since they said it runs client-side. I wonder how that works, specifically. I wish they streamed the presentation.

>>51697539
100 viewers and empty seats
someone need to throw a big mac in sergeys face

didnt tron do a copy paste of LINK oracles and called them Tron Sun or something like that

cant believe they let adelyn do the subtitles

>>51701991
Arr time row!

This tron presentation is unbearable

>>51702435
How do they make it in US colleges?
I wonder what his english was like then

>>51702435
he can't string a single sentence in one take
cuts every 20 seconds
not to mention his retarded accent

>>51700109
Absolutely and utterly grim.

Fuuuck does anyone know what's going on, is Hauptsturmfuhrer Felten speaking right now?

>>51702487
>>51702488
It’s not even that his accent is destroying these tech buzzwords, it’s that this guy is 100% full of shit and this entire presentation is a sales call about tron which I don’t think people give two shits about.

post steves

>>51702673
Isn't Ellis talking today too? Wish these fucks would just stream it, what are they hiding.

>>51700109
what fucking basement rave room venue is this? what were they thinking?

>>51702673
Woah

>>51702743
it looks like a concrete bunker, where else would be suitable to house a discussion with schmidt in NYC?

>>51702743
It will say in the history books that Chainlink started in a basement as it will become the next success story and compared to Google and Apple starting in a garage.

>>51702092
To be fair though this is maybe just the client side app and not the entirety of DECO. I mean, in the end it's worthless without DONs and their ability to send and receive data from these provers

>>51697539
DECO alpha test stage live on testnet. Cool demo of signing a rental contract without doxing yourself.

Dammit does anyone know anything about what Feltenberger said?

Wtf, what about sam bankman and Ed Fulters. It ended already.

>>51702932
Did they mention anything or hint about mainnet

what about SEE SEE EYE PEE

>>51703026
Not happening this year, they didn't give any time estimate at all.

>>51702990
This is what I wanna know. I'm at work right now and easy-to-access info is non-existent on this shit. God damn jews not streaming this shit. It's not a fucking Tool concert, this is supposed to be community driven reee

Did we get scammed?

This was the best and easiest opportunity to liquidate the shorts and pump the price back to double digits.
The amount of fud on /biz/ yesterday was insane too.

I wanted to get an idea of what to expect in the future and all I got was a delayed staking release with more information to come on Monday and no news on CCIP.

Everything that was a breadcrumb got confirmed, but I never doubted that it was true.
The most positive thing in all of this was Eric giving me hope that his influence can improve the business side of things.

I think the partner growth program and economics 2.0 may have come from his influence.
He knows exactly what investors want and how to generate hype.

>>51703036
What're anon's estimates? Considering they've got working prototypes already, I imagine it's coming out around middle of next year.

>>51703488
Checked. I'd say give it a few days before declaring any effect it may have had on the price. It is fucking amazing though how literally no amount of good news seems to change link's trajectory into the shitter. Like fucking Eric Schmidt straight up going on stage and saying we're all gonna make it and we're in the right place to capitalize on the next big tech boom. If that happened to any shitcoin it'd be 10xing every day for like a month.

>>51703566
This. Blackrock and Vanguard are literally waiting to get his Coinbase KYC approved to market buy LINK

How many viewers today? 20 or so?

>>51702932
> alpha

In regards to Eric's talk yesterday, does any anon have more insight on the homomorphic encryptions he mentioned?

>>51703566
Thats no what anyone took from away from this. Obviously you being a cult alters your ability to comprehend. It was basically an announcement that Sergey is unfit to lead and is driving this into the ground (just like the coin price)

>>51703488
>>51703566
I can't understand how the price action has been so shit.
I've holded from the start and this price action is literally driving me insane.
I have days when I think that no matter what happens - link will only be the price of a coffee cup while niggercoin, apeNFT, and some doge with a bat token moons x100000.

I want out of this torment, its not funny anymore.

To make things worse - Sergey announced staking on jan 1th. while we are literally getting staking just before 2023 starts. Like what the fuck? This year holding link has been the first because I've been waiting for staking to go live since the 1st of January - with these hardcore WTFWT news only to dump the price.

Well...
>three more months and the pain will stop................

>>51703612
I don't think it's being streamed today for some god damned reason, there's nobody even in this thread.

arbitrum FSS confirmed

>>51703857
By Felten?

>>51703566
The problem is that there is no roadmap and another delay.
Sergey's trust level is 0.
He proved his ability to delay releases and didn't even notify investors.

He has a fundamental flaw in his lack of greed which may cause him issues in the far future when he grows too big.

I wanted to get a roadmap and an idea of what to expect from this SmartCon and I got nothing with the exception of staking v0.1 delayed to December.

I have no idea how Chainlink will grow in the future and integrate new projects, and when to expect CCIP.
It felt good to have all the breadcrumbs revealed and the part with Eric, but I didn't learn anything new about the project itself.
Instead my hopium has been displaced onto Eric hoping that he could salvage Sergey's lack of greed with his business knowledge.

What I wanted to know is how long staking v0.1 would take until a v1.0 is released, the conditions and rules for staking, get a better idea of how it would affect token economics, learn more about CCIP which is hidden from us on this second day.

The most insane bullish thing I heard was the BTC risk interest rate like price feed making BTC into a nation state with its own interest rate free from the dollar, but that's more bullish for BTC than for Chainlink.
Sergey does not want Chainlink to become a monopoly and a dictator.
He only wants to help the space grow and fills the missing spaces for this.

I have no model from a previous business with someone with a similar mindset that I can apply to this.
My own bias makes me more similar to Eric than to Sergey from a mindset perspective and I don't approve of Sergey's way of doing things even if it works and results in exceptional success.

This makes me conflicted. Chainlink will reach $1000 easily one day, but the management of the project makes me uncomfortable.

>>51703806
Then look at this paid fud working for a CeFi short seller or a big whale trying to accumulate more.
Even if I thought the project would go to $0 I could not sell because it makes economic sense to short squeeze them first the same way as VW did years ago.

>>51703874
yes

>>51703932
No he didn’t fag. I was there

>>51703932
Can you give me any more details? Did he just come out, say FSS nao, and drop the mic? Thanks for the info based tune-in anon.

>>51703924
Blah blah theres no conspiracy you fucking loser. Read the comment above yours. The team doesnt communicate, doesnt execute, and doesnt have a leader. No one in the business world cares about any of this. They could, but given the absolutelt atrocious leadership, they dont, and some sweaty nerd in an oversized flannel reading off powerpoints wont change that. Your delusion cant allow you to accept that.

>>51703811
The LINK token doesn't capture any financial value right now and unlike the rest of the coins you mentioned isn't very exciting to the average investor.

>>51703811
Sergey has made it very easy for the short sellers and big whales to suppress his token's price and he still doesn't understand what it means to be on someone's list.

Because of all the manipulation I can't predict what will happen and we are in a stalemate.
We need Eric's business competence to liquidate these shorts if we want the price manipulation to stop.
We can expect some positive changes but it will take a bit more time.

I will give here one final warning to the Chainlink team and Sergey.
Your token has been on the list of a group of billionaires since 2020 and they want to accumulate everything for themselves.
You are free to ignore this, but you will in time pay the price for this and if you don't do something against this you will in time lose the support of your community and at that moment you will be at your weakest and powerless to fight against your foes.

Chainlink needs to remain neutral, but if they gain too much control of it I can't predict what they will do and may with time gain control over the development and management of the network.
The same issue as ETH with staking can happen to Chainlink.
If someone owns 51% of the tokens in 10 years they may be able to decide on the use and development of the network.
At the minimum they would be able to have total control over the token price like for FED currently does for the $.

The bitcoin development group is controlled by such a group.

Chainlink's mechanism for price discovery is extremely critical for the future of the world if it becomes similar to a reserve currency and needs to be as neutral and objective as possible and outside of one group's control.

>>51704014
Nexo is insolvent.

>>51703881
>there is no roadmap and another delay
Way to contradict yourself in the same damn sentence lol

>>51704043
>>51704110
The situation of the world just makes everything unbearable. Al ot of my vacced friends have gotten some complications, autoimmune diseases, weird rashes, unexplainable health conditions jadda jadda. haven't made it yet.
The propaganda that we have had to endure for the last years have been insane.
I don't want to have any part in this clown world. Its not looking to get any better from here, only worse.
My whole networth is tied into LINK and its starting to feel like the biggest mistake I have made.
I need that money to survive the oppression from the government.
It really has been shitty around the world since covid-19 started.
In what kind of hell are we living?

>>51704267
Then tell me what to expect.
Staking v0.1 in December

Staking v1.0?
CCIP?
DECO?
new integrations and growth of the network?


What I expected was staking v0.1 in October, CCIP v0.1 in December, staking v1.0 around May of 2023 and CCIP V1.0 end of next year.
What I expect now is staking V0.1 in December, CCIP v0.1 in March 2023 or June 2023 if they don't release it this year and take more time, and staking V1.0 coming out when CCIP requires it.

>>51704043
>The LINK token doesn't capture any financial value right now
How do BTC or ETH capture value right now?

>just partnered with Swift
>"not very exciting for the average investor"
You're a fucking retard lmao

>>51704380
>it's later than I personally expected, so it's delayed

>>51704380
CCIP won’t be this year. I’m at the con and they’re saying CCIP is not ready at all

>>51704398
Will you still repeat this if they don't release CCIP this year?

I would be happy to be proven wrong.
But if I think this then the others must be even more negative in their views than me.

My expectations came from models and from reading behind the lines.
There were multiple delays but those were not openly communicated to the public for some reason and results in the current lack of trust of some investors.

>>51704512
>Will you still repeat this if they don't release CCIP this year?
If this happens, it'll be the first delay Chainlink ever perpetrated.

>>51704398
come on, they are clearly releasing a half baked piece of junk last minute to save some face

>>51704527
What staking was going to look like has been known for months now.

>>51704522
They certainly wouldn't be able to hide this and I would likely short Chainlink if it happens.

As for the remaining hopium I have a few ideas:
Conditions for staking v0.1 and more information about its conditions and roadmap starting from next Monday.

The team may delay some of their announcement because of this shitty market and are waiting a bit until the market is in a healthier state.
It would be a good idea to wait until October and the market recovers before making more announcements.

What we are missing today is going to be released alongside with blog articles explaining different important new features and items on the roadmap progressively over the next weeks.
Staking having a website to check your status should have a positive effect next week as it gives the understanding that it exists and allows projection into the future.
Imagination is where everything happens.

Eric Schmidt is a very powerful connection and he demonstrated an exceptional ability to generate hype and understand how to manage a project against bad actors.
He won't let this project fail and I think he may have contacted Sergey on his own initiative because he wanted to help after seeing Sergey's positive attitude and the invisible dangers he was facing.
In a way he is like /biz/ and wants to help, but has a lot more experience and power than we individually have.

>>51704581
>we are going to release a piece of junk sometime this year (might be soon, haha, who knows, the real version might be ready as well soon after, who knows). now that we managed your expectations, it's ok to release the announced junk the last possible instant
ok

>>51704677
They're releasing staking like they released mainnet, there's nothing "not real" about it.

>>51704711
yeah, it's real garbage. but feel free to defend them while they spend investor money on frivolous shit like a self congratulatory conference

>>51704744
>yeah, it's real garbage
Chainlink mainnet is garbage?

>>51704664
>The team may delay some of their announcement because of this shitty market and are waiting a bit until the market is in a healthier state.
I'm pretty sure this is also why they didn't release staking sooner this year.

>>51703881
>I don't approve of Sergey's way of doing things even if it works and results in exceptional success.

Chainlink is in a unique position as the value capture occurs at the protocol layer. As long as CCIP becomes the dominate protocol link wins. It doesn’t matter that it is a completely open ecosystem and anyone can run a node because the protocol captures the value.

what is link biggest competitor? i'd say quant

>>51704753
the still unreleased 0.1 of staking is garbage. imagine you are a paying someone to do a job. they spend a lot of your money to host an event where they tell you that progress is slow (unspoken: you not only paid for the worlds most expensive status update, planning the event also set back the timeline). are you happy with that someones performance?

>>51705073
The release of staking is pretty much exactly like the release of mainnet. It starts small and with a single feed.

>>51704398
typically when a company says "this year", they dont mean December 31st at 11:59 pm. Obviously being autistic you don't realize that. They also said CCIP this year which is now clearly not happening.

>>51703857
There's never any good news so no

>>51705168
You're like a woman trying to make your feelings more important than facts.

>>51704581
That's definitely not true. They just now released who will even be able to stake. Man you're kind of a snake eh

>>51705168
>They also said CCIP this year which is now clearly not happening.
source?

>>51705190
>They just now released who will even be able to stake
They described who this was going to be months ago.

>>51704753
That was caused by the ETH merge delay.
His partners from the older finance wanted PoS before using the network to prevent negative feedback from their ecology indoctrinated customers.

This switch was also a dangerous step and it made sense for Chainlink to wait until it was over before doing something risky like CCIP.
The reasons for the delays are outside of their control as it comes from their partners.

The timing caused the last delay.
They have to wait 1 month after the merge to do something from a risk management perspective and hat the SmartCon just after making them busy with the preparations.
They will have a 1-2 week recovery time after this week and then restart operations.
The FED next important meeting is on the 2nd of November and October may look less shitty.
Making a staking release in December is a bit later than what would be comfortable, but from a macro perspective it may make more sense.
What's important is to know the time frame for the growth of this initial staking and how quickly it can grow.
If we can see next month a bit more on this it's not a big issue to wait a bit more.

>>51704800
>success

You're down 90% as an investment into this. That's what this is, an investment. To better our lives. Not to join a tech cult.

>>51705189
Projection.

>>51705193
The source is reality. It's not out nor will it be by Jan 1st

>>51705250
December 2022 is still "this year".
There is zero evidence that CCIP is not launching this year.

These are the facts.
Your feelings do not matter.

>>51705230
>You're down 90%
Yes, even while Chainlink completely took over Defi, and is now confirmed working with Swift on taking over the capital markets.
Meanwhile Cardano, Doge, and other useless trash are valued twice as high as Chainlink.

>>51705144
>the development cycle has been wasteful and slow as molasses in the past as well, that's why this is fine
ok

>>51705267
>The source is reality
And by reality you mean your feelings.

>>51705226
Nah. A while back someone posted a screenshot of the team confirming it was not related to ETH merge. I believe it was Ari.

You guys love making up excuses based on your assumption of what's happening. All of that last paragraph is you just making up a timeline based on nothing, trying to sound authoritative.

>>51705285
Mainnet took a hell of a long time too, and it started small.
Now look at it.

>>51705226
>from a macro perspective

Get fucked dude. You gotta be kidding me. Like this team gives a fuck after sabotaging their investors entire '21.

Smartcon, more like dumbcon amiright?

>>51705307
I guess we'll see then. I'll be here on Jan 1 to say I told you so. Then Sergey can make another Jan 1st video to announce that staking 1.0 will be out "this year" along with CCIP. Then next year after the annual street drum performance we'll just repeat this argument. It'll become an annual tradition. 10 more years marines!

>>51704800
Chainlink is losing its first mover advantage progressively as time goes.
If an alternative grows too much they will enter from a position of weakness and capture less of the initial market even if they have a superior product with more features.
They will get the business from the DTCC, and Swift which will be very profitable, but they will keep getting this bad treatment from other participants in the crypto space.

They are also losing their community's support with every delay and for not protecting their token from outsider price manipulation.
Those who remained have endured very traumatic experiences.
Sergey may have joked about not being that insane yet, but most of the Link marines must be in a similar state.

>>51705331
since we are extrapolating from the past, the release will also do nothing for the price as well?

hope you are well bros, cant wait for monday for the staking website. seems we are getting jipped out of a stream

>>51705339
They may have ignored it in 2021, but things changed after their successful attempt at defusing the Consensys fud attempt for the staking announcement, and Eric's influence.
They know what bad actors are doing and won't let it remain this way.

>>51705398
>losing community’s support
>those who have remained have endured traumatic experiences
source on this?

>>51705459
>>51697539

>>51705408

>>51705398
>Chainlink is losing its first mover advantage progressively as time goes.

No they aren’t. No one uses Band, or API3, or Supra oracles. Just stop it, link has 95%+ of all usage and integrations

>>51705230
I’m not down 90%, I’m up 800%

>>51705459
I can't find his posts but someone collected the reactions last year of disbelief.

I learned of Stoicism personally too last year after enduring exceptional pain.

>>51705647
It seems there was a misunderstanding.
oracles are an already released feature.

I meant my comments for CCIP and interoperability.

>>51704664
If shooting chainlink is the alternative to your whining then please take that route ASAP

>>51705285
Nobody is selling you faggot. Fuck off

>>51697539
Hot off the presses boys
https://files.catbox.moe/zgy5xx.mp4

>>51704312
Most of us only wanted freedom and peace.
It may really be that someone wanted us to become the last hope of our civilization and help it survive and we are being changed to be fit for this role.

You need to learn to take profits, to diversify and to create multiple income streams.
Don't become overly dependent on Chainlink or it will grow into your weakness.

>>51705459
Not him but it very clearly is losing all community engagement, link threads can stay up for days now. Chainlink twitter is totally dead. 700 people were watching smartcon yesterday.

>>51703881
this might be the dumbest thing i’ve ever read. are woman posting on /biz/ now? get your emotions in check

>>51704512
There's literally zero chance of CCIP this year or even Q1/2 next year. They haven't given any timeframes at all and the fact that they broke staking down into v0.1 just in order to get it out the door in december this year shows they are willing to push whatever they can. I actually think we'll be talking about if we'll see CCIP at next smartcon.

>>51703881
>in his lack of greed

>>51706567
>>51706151

>>51706656
Yeah testnet. Staking has been there for 3 years and CCIP is arguably even more important to do right. It's definitely no earlier than Q2 next year, I'm betting on Q3. Screencap me on that.

>>51706713
Staking has been on test net for 3 years? Are you fudders even trying anymore?

>>51705398
i’m convinced sergey pays a team to FUD on /biz/ to decouple the tokens image from 4chan

>>51703857
>>51703874
Ed Felten also said chainlink nodes would be Arbitrum validators which was a lie so I wouldn't place much faith in Off Chain Labs

>>51700109
>8AM
>Prerecorded TRON presentation
>AHAHAA IT EMPTY STINKIES HOW WILL YOU EVER RECOVER
Stellar FUD.

>>51706825

CCIP demo between Goerli and Rinkeby; simple ping/response demo:https://twitter.com/i/status/1575555523105419264

Contracts for the demo:
https://goerli.etherscan.io/address/0x2681f959bECE0e908A330cfd1be1Dd601866991F#code
https://rinkeby.etherscan.io/address/0x80aa9e26BddB4d8f2E9CBC46Db3292dbD6b0506E#code

>>51705398
wtf are you talking about? the only redeeming quality is that competitors are so far behind it's not even funny

>>51706900
Thank you.
Could you detail what the demo did?
Where did the ping pong response originate from and go to and what part of the feature was demonstrated?

>>51706900
checked and based

>>51706900
It sent messages between two different ETH testnets?
So this would be the CCIP feature.
How does it work and what are the parameters of it?
It uses a Chainlink node as an intermediary between the two chains to deliver messages.
What are the weaknesses of this if a hacker was looking for an attack vector?

How is the security model if someone wants to use it to create a bridge?
Where is the point responsible for security?
The Chainlink node network?

>>51707141
stop posting

>>51707198
the retard is on a mission to make a fool of himself, leave him its amusing

CCIP isn't happening. Theyve only got a POC after five years of working on it. Anyone who works in the tech industry can clearly tell this shit is vaporware and they just have too many roadblocks into actually making it possible. But they have to give an impression that they're doing something though. SWIFT talks won't go anywhere and the reason they even came to Smartcon itself is out of respect for Eric Schmidt.

>>51705230
4.4.4.4

>>51697539
Can someone live stream the Building Next-Generation Financial Services Infrastructure presentation at 4:30? I really want to see that

>>51706900
Legendary moment

>>51704380
Literally faster than any other shitcoin in the industry. I know this is FUD but other coins aren’t even close to a v0.1 of anything. None of them. Only chainlink. No crypto team can “deliver” anything without it

>>51706900
I read the contract.
Whats the most interesting part is this:
interface CCIPReceiverInterface {
struct ReceivedMessage {
uint256 sourceChainId;
bytes sender;
bytes data;
IERC20[] tokens;
uint256[] amounts;
}


function _respond(uint256 pingPongCount) private {
if (pingPongCount & 1 == 1) {
emit Ping(pingPongCount);
} else {
emit Pong(pingPongCount);
}

bytes memory data = abi.encode(pingPongCount);
CCIPRouterInterface.Message memory message = CCIPRouterInterface.Message({
receiver: s_counterpartAddress,
data: data,
tokens: new IERC20[](0),
amounts: new uint256[](0),
gasLimit: 200_000
});
s_sendingRouter.ccipSend(s_counterpartChainId, message);
}

This currently sends the ping pong count number as a message to another chain and if I understand doesn't create or transfer tokens in this instance.
You can define a chain ID, an address on this chain, and you have the choice of either sending a message or transferring tokens, or both.

I don't understand well the token transfer part between two chains and don't understand what happens to the token in the chain of origin when sending it to another chain.
This relies on a chain ID and address meaning there may be a compatibility issue with chains using a different structure than ETH, but most chains added an ETH EVM to be compatible with ETH contracts.
This could have the limitation that CCIP initially only works between ETH compatible chains, but it could be extended if something else comes.

The Chainlink node has a heavy responsibility in this as it transmits the message between two chains and getting control of it could cause serious damage.
This is how a Layer 0 would look like and where the high staking requirements with a DON model for security come from.

Does someone know where the token from the original chain ends up after a transfer message to the other chain?
I am not an expert but my initial understanding would be that the token gets transferred on the first chain to the token contract owner of the second chain with the same address and this receiving contract on the second chain has the power to create new tokens on the second chains and release the tokens on the first chains.

In this case Chainlink would act as an intermediary between multiple chains, and the contracts and their owner are responsible for the on chain token transfer function itself.
I am not an expert for bridges but this would mean that the contracts themselves could be vulnerable to hacks if badly written, but Chainlink would have the ability to prevent a misuse by bad actors as a messaging intermediary with its security module.

In this security model Chainlink nodes have a high amount of responsibility, but do not hold all of it and leave some of the risks and management to contract owners.
This would be a healthier business model allowing for growth of 2 business partners, each having a way to profit from such a system without being too parasitic on the other.

An interesting thing when looking at this contract is that it is very simple and efficient.
However the feature itself running on the Chainlink nodes should be a lot more complex because of the high security requirements.

This achieves the effect of making CCIP very simple to implement for developers, while moving the complexity to the Chainlink network.
A good and efficient implementation.
The money paid for the security will go to where the complexity lies in the Chainlink network, will remain low through this shared responsibility with the contract owner and will greatly speed up the adoption rate for this new feature through its simplicity of use.

Excellent!

>>51707980
>>51708150
>>51708245
Thanks for that, anon

>>51704806
Who cares

>>51708150
The tokens should be locked up in a contract while a (((wrapped))) version is issued on the other chain
The communication between the two chains is pretty important

>>51701663
What does DECO do?
Sry, I slept for a long time

What did Aave Head of Developers Relations mean by this?

>>51709079
DECOrations in the metaverse.

You can buy safely a new couch for in your metaverse home for example. Pretty neato

Anyone have a quick rundown on the end of smartcon "Townhall"

>>51701663
It will make Chainlink into a monopoly.
Everyone will need it and will thus have to use Chainlink services.

>>51708574
Yes this makes sense.
This part is missing from this contract which means that the developer making the contract calling the messaging system would be responsible for it.

It's the best solution, because I didn't want Chainlink to carry such a heavy burden.
Chainlink will be like a guard rail helping bridges and communication to grow between chains, while giving them a safe, easy and protected way of interacting.
The Anti fraud network will be able to protect it from bad actors even if the developer who made the contract makes a big mistake.

If a contract gets hacked, the Chainlink node can block the initial transaction with its fraud detection making most hacks impossible or react very quickly in the worst case.
There is also a pause function to quickly freeze the system on chain.

>>51707141
Those ETH testnets are independent. Yes the security model lies within the Don. That is where the value capture happens and sufficient collateral is needed for said CCIP bridges.

did steve ellis talk yet?

>>51697539
>smartcon
>a bunch of shitcoin sellers
>faint smell of curry in the background
>tokens that arent needed

>>51701381
They have a mod on here

>>51706900
Checked
Thanks for posting anon, genuinely exciting

>>51704664
>may have contacted Sergey on his own initiative
kek more like the democracy makers sent him in to oversee things

>>51710460
I'm so excited for you guys

>>51709220
Correct me if I did not understand correctly.
So todays CCIP demo only transferred messages between PinpPongDemo contracts deployed on Goerli and Rinkeby blockchains.

And if you want to transfer tokens between the chains, you need a contract in origin chain which locks the tokens in contract, then sends message as seen in PingPongDemo to destination chain and there would need to be contract which mints equal amount of tokens in destination chain. And of course sending back means that this token burns the minted tokens, sends message to first chain which unlocks the tokens in contract.

And the question that has risen is, will Chainlink deploy also those token locking/minting/burning contracts as part of CCIP or is that job left for 3rd parties and CCIP will just handle the messaging.

*contract burns the minted....

i can't make it thru the shmidt talk. serg is just too cringe this time.

>>51710775
It'll have to be embedded in CCIP for the current interface to work. That also means that Chainlink oracles will have to secure the total value of the tokens flowing through CCIP.

Okay LG frens that's a wrap!
weirdest SmartCon 22 moment go
For me it was day one at the very start I was sitting near the front and the announcer said in a loud Big Brother voice
>"Attention All SmartCon 22 Attendees, The Playing of "Under the Sea" and any other Songs related to Crabs and The Little Mermaid is Strictly Forbidden at SmartCon 22"
They repeated the same announcement on Day Two weird right?

>>51707980
>>51708150
>>51708245
>>51709220
thank you for these very based posts

>>51710775
>will Chainlink deploy also those token locking/minting/burning contracts as part of CCIP
I doubt it. I think Chainlink wants other people to build the bridges and CCIP will just be the infrastructure that securely communicates between chains. Link wins either way.

>>51710842
Yeah sounds right. When Chainlink stakers secure the bridge, it has to be the whole thing. There would be no point to leave that minting/burning/locking part to 3rd party because Chainlink Labs would still need to verify and audit the code in those to prevent any hacks, so they may aswell write and deploy those contracts themselves.

>>51710980
There are also benefits in this scenario for sure.
But yes, Link wins either way.

Oh right another weird thing. After York's presentation I went over to say hi and there were a few others around him so I joined the group but every time someone mentioned their project or developing he would interrupt and take a selfie with that person then say "this is going on my Twitter" then just ignore the person and talk to the next one. When I tried to push the issue saying I am interested in developing with ZKs he changed the topic to Vitalik and his Twitter account always he would mention that he could message Vitalik on Twitter sometime during the conversation. I got my photo taken with him after that and he said "this is going on my Twitter" then he just walked away.

>>51710775
I think this will remain the responsibility of the 3rd party developers using CCIP, but CCIP will remove a lot of the risks associated with bridges and it will enable inter chain and hybrid web to chain communication which currently does not exist.
In its current form this is a messaging system between different chains and outside chain systems.

However it would be possible for the Chainlink team to release a CCIP compatible and tested contract to take care of this token minting and burn function other developers could reuse as a model.

I prefer that this remains the responsibility of the devs using CCIP and not Chainlink's because then it could exponentially increase the security costs of the infrastructure as it would require a responsible person for each bridge and network.
The developers will keep control of it and that part of the responsibility, but will have an easy to use system they can quickly implement with a few function calls.

It will be similar to the current DeFi model.
A DeFi platform can use Chainlink oracle price feeds to build a decentralized financial system.
In this case those same DeFi platforms can keep doing the same thing and use these new functions to execute transaction on all chains from one point of execution.

It will enable a lot of new use cases with this model too.
Having a system a new developer can quickly implement and use without a management bottleneck on Chainlink's side allows an exponential adoption without limitations.

>>51711065
That's our Yorke!

>>51711104
I imagine something like AAVE will have an optional choice like "Would you like to enable automatic transfer of your tokens to other chains for maximum yield?"

>>51711104
In that case the CCIP will be very simple protocol. It is just basically inbox and outbox contracts in chains and the Chainlink nodes between them as a courier. Highly secure courier of course, backed by collateral deposited in Link.

>>51711308
Yes. Literally all it is and all it should be. It does enable a lot for developers though

>>51711277
This will basically arbitrage the yields to equal between all chains.

>>51707056
The contract on Goerli emits a Ping event an updates a counter variable and the contract on Rinkeby emits a Pong event and updates the same counter. So you see the counter go up:

> Ping: counter == 1
> Pong: counter == 2
> Ping: counter == 3
...

And so on and so forth. It's to demonstrate that the contracts are interacting with each other through CCIP as you can verify that only the odd number counts are on Goerli and even on Rinkeby.

CCIP is usable, but there's still work to be done in maximizing security.

>tfw no one's buying my shitty NFTs so I can slurp more under $8

>>51711339
This demo was between two EVM chains. There might be still work in progress for CCIP to work at broader spectrum.

>>51711365
Touche. I forget about non EVM chains.

>>51710775
I think CCIP really is just the ability to send and receive messages across chains. I think the team also announced a while back an actual token bridge that would rely on CCIP to function...that might be where the contracts live and are maintained, but I don't know if anyone really knows the technical specifics about how that bridge is going to work.

Jesus christ. The second half of smartcon had one thread only and it didn't even nearly reach bump limit.

>>51711227
I heard this story over a few drinks at the SmartCon 22 After Party so I cannot attest to the veracity of the claims but, anyways, I'll just tell it verbatim, as it was told to me...

I was at SmartCon 22 and needed to use the bathroom, so I went in and before long there's the sound of the door opening and a guy comes in and knocks at my stall.

*KNOCK* *KNOCK* *KNOCK* *KNOCK* *KNOCK* *KNOCK* *KNOCK*

He knocked seven times exactly, apparently, at least according to the person who told me this story after a few drinks.
"Umm yes?" I murmured, a little unsure of what was going to happen next.
"Its ChainlinkGod, open up!" came a loud voice in reply.
"I'm sorry?" I responded in a questioning way
*BANG* *BANG* *BANG* *BANG* *BANG* *BANG* *BANG*
"ITS CHAINLINKGOD FROM TWITTER OPEN UP" The yelling and banging were enough to set my teeth on edge and send chills down my spine but I gathered up all my courage and I challenged him in my bravest voice
"how do I know it's you?"
"You know who I am don't you?"
"I dont know your face" I admitted
"I'm from Twitter" he repeated again as if it gave further truth to his claims
"OPEN THIS STALL WE NEED TO TALK" He shouted and began shaking the door with all his might. The hinges began to buckle and I thought all hope was lost so I tried to get him to calm down, "prove it" I squeezed out in a squeaky voice.
He stopped shaking the toilet stall door for a moment and asked how
"Are you wearing your famous mask?"
He said he had forgotten it on flight to SmartCon 22.
I thought for a moment but this "Chainlinkgod" character was impatient and began shouting and shaking the toilet stall door again "YOU KNOW ME IM FROM TWITTER"
I asked if he could tweet something to prove who he was and he stopped shaking the door and asked for a special code word, I said use Big Macs and he did. I checked Twitter and sure enough there it was a certified on-demand Big Mac tweet from the account he claimed to be.

>>51711636
I apologized and Chainlinkgod now real after verifying his identity. He said "you can never be too careful" so I got up flushed the toilet, pulled my pants up and opened the stall.

And after that there was a silence as the guy who told me this story finished chugging his seventh beer of the evening. He looked at me and said, "do you know who he saw when he opened the door?"

Obviously the answer came to me straight away and I said "Chainlinkgod" but the guy shook his head and said no there was no one there.

>>51710775
>will Chainlink deploy also those token locking/minting/burning contracts as part of CCIP
Sergey already said they are building a reference implementation of a programmable token bridge, so yes you can just use Chainlink's locking/minting/burning contracts. It's technically distinct from CCIP, it is a layer on top of it.

>>51711512
mainly as they didn't stream the second day, they just had four hours of prereorded youtube only talks which was pretty annoying
guess as they wanted people to attend but still... didn't see a lot of talks including arbitrum using fss... ccip demo and partners who have tested... linkpool... etc

>>51711359
Did you make the foxes?

>>51711308
Simplicity is best.
A simple idea is the most powerful.
Being able to make something complex simple is the proof of a master.

>>51711339
Did the person doing the demo say there was still something left to do for the security part?
Did he say what was still missing or give a hint on the timeline for this feature?
The security may require a form of predefined set of rules to detect bad behavior and may one day use a form of low level AI.

>>51701663
>they don't really make money off that i guess but it's just another piece of the whole domination picture
If their vision comes to pass it will be so ubiquitous, its usage will be everywhere that it will make money. How much? Not as much as other aspects but saying it won't make money is naive.

>>51701381
What does this mean?

>>51704110
Bro, just shut up. Sergey is the leader we need. Eric is just a useful psychopath that needs to stay as an advisor,and nothing more.

>>51704110
>I-I will give here one final warning!
you're such a retarded faggot it's unreal
the team owes you nothing
you're just a dumb animal looking to profit off of it and survive the changes it will bring just like everyone else

>>51704312
Go back to /pol/ and take your meds and stop posting. You're fucking embarrassing.

>>51713263
There's a reason why they say Chainlink is a /pol/ coin. I have a hard time investing in something that's adjacent to so many morons and racists.

>>51713402
You're as bad as him if you can't free yourself from this tribal think.

>>51711636
>>51711703
kek underrated

>>51713402
/spit

>>51701991
bullish on rarible!

>>51711104
inb4 lots of hacks and blaming chainlink CCIP for their own mistakes

bump

>>51702412
Why's he dressed like Mr.Bean?

>>51708150
most likely they will write their own "Chainlink sanctioned" token contracts on other chains first, ie link-SOL on ethereum or link-ETH in Solana. Then later they might open it up to others

>>51713402
Just wait until FBI crime stats are cryptographically verified and stored on chain

>>51716420
>impying they wont tamper with the data prior to putting it on chain ala 2020 election

>>51697539
MOBI Holders think their coins is going to be used. David ran off with their cash to the camen Islands lol

>>51705168
from past experiences when a team/project delivers a product at the very last moment of deadline/announced date then it's usually a very bad sign

>>51712042
bump for this anons posts

why is this thread being allowed to die? hmmm

What happened to ETH talks?

I guess they ended up being a nothing burger and anons projecting that LINK will be used to build blocks or who knows what else were wrong as always?

>>51700109
kek what the fuck. I missed this one, mustve been too early and no one gives a flying fuck about this clown

I've decided to sell my 60k Link and put it all on Tron. Who's with me (except Justin)?

kek bump

>>51724690
this.

>>51704744
I'm out of this project. I hope I recovers in the next bull run. I can't believe I actually believed that something good is going to come out LINK. I don't know how to face my friends on our weekend game nights on GameStar+ interactive board game streaming platform. They will scream we told you so.