/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>53157999
Now that we know how to interpret Sergey's ways to weasel himself around deadlines with his talks, its safe to say that it will not come in 2023, or otherwise he would have made a big announcement on the first of jan that it will be released "soon this year", even if only a tiny alpha v 0.1 sliver of ccip would have been released on 31st of dec this year.

>>53158084
In previous years we have had a real first half the year lull so i wonder if that will happen again. Then they hope from july onwards smartcon "hype" is enough to carry them to september/november.

>>53157999
Closer to August

>>53158094
Was smartcon 22 a success? Did it drive developer adoption? Was it good for price action? It would be surprise if they host a smartcon this year again.

Also, I dont know how much chainlink is aware how much bad the current investor mood is. Hosting a smartcon when price is $2-3 will likely result in people getting killed.

>>53158094
the fat fuck killed any positive sentiment from long term holder. Anyone bullish right now are stacklets. i used to think 2$ was a meme but i see that being the case now

>>53158147
>Also, I dont know how much chainlink is aware how much bad the current investor mood is.
they dont know because community advocate block any of that reaching past them

I don't give a fuck when it's coming out desu lol

>>53158147
Of course they'll do one, it's basically all they do anyway. As for sentiment yeah they're aware. Most of their twitter posts get shit now and they've clearly started directing advocates a bit more in counter messaging.

>>53158209
kek for people that are into truth so much they dont seem to get that you cant fight truth. even with jewish pilpul

>>53157999
I predict in 2024 Chainlink and LayerZero become the first multibillion dollar merger within crypto.
Since LayerZero now uses Chainlink anyway it would be more efficient for them to just add in any unique features of CCIP as an extension of LZ since the base concepts are the same and LZ already has a head start in the market now.
Would literally be a win-win and something that would happen irl outside of crypto if two companies were in a similar position imo. Or one would buy the other(Link buys LZ? Maybe too expensive for them right now given the bear).
Polygon actually did something similar with Hermez. But that was only 250m iirc. This would be two multibillion dollar valuation orgs.

>>53157999
>>53157245
>>53157113
>>53155278
>>53153380
>>53154747
>>53154670
>>53150929
>>53150234
>>53149897
>>53145671
>>53146678
>>53146983
>>53147586
>>53149271
>>53143968
>PLEASE SELL PLEASE PLEASE JUST SELL YOUR STAKED TOKENS SIRS PLS

>>53158250
Yeah. Big part of why their initial proposal for staking v0.1 was completely absurd. Company has built up their identity on this cheesy TRUTH > TRUST catchphrase. They release the first iteration of the thing (I'm not going to even get into whether we should even count it as staking) everyone has been waiting for since day 1, and the whole agreement between stakers and Chainlink relies on stakers trusting Chainlink to let them withdraw their tokens at some point. Just unbelievable. And the fact that adding the ability to withdraw tokens takes a year? What in the fuck?

chainshit is such a scam lmao

I remember telling you back in Summer that staking would happen that year and you were all screeching "2024" and suchlike. Of course, those declarations were conveniently brushed under the carpet when it was realised that staking WAS coming out that year.
It's the same pattern with everything Chainlink. Mainnet, staking, vrf the list just goes on and on. I don;t really see why I should pay any attention to fud when you lot are consistently wrong.
CCIP is coming this year, probably in March, and all that you will do is revise your lies as though you never made them.
$1000 eoy

>>53159244
>$1000 eoy
imagine still posting this cringe catchphrase in 2023

>>53159244
You've been spouting $1000 eoy since 2017. $5, you're not even double digits. Your "staking" is sending tokens to a wallet sergey holds and promising to pay you government bond yields and trust him to allow withdrawals at some point

>>53157999
Can't be late if it never shows up.

>>53159272
it's unironically financial cuckoldry, these people are happy about it and won't complain about the price even if Link were to hit $2

>>53159272
Someone refute this fud. Pro tip: you can’t

>>53157999
Considering it is the holy grail of Blockchain tech along with zkrollups, I don't really understand why anyone expected to be "easy"

>>53159272
>ignores my main point and instead laser-focusses in on our motto. Says a lot kek
$2000 eoy

>>53159244
But we're talking about CCIP which is explicitly late. The question is how off target they were. March would be pretty shameful.

>>53158147
They sell tokens to investors that want to see progress. With this money they host a convention where they tell investors that they didn't make progress.

>>53159244
>he's doing victory laps over sergey delivering a half assed product he promised in jan 2022
>CCIP is coming this year, probably in March

>>53159586
>explicitly late
Swift ISO20022 was put back to March. Didn't you know?

>>53160040
https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-accepts-community-request-start-iso-20022-migration-march-2023
Imagine pretending to not know about this

>>53160040
>https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-accepts-community-request-start-iso-20022-migration-march-2023
>>53160072

What is the current thing that people are claiming Swift is using Chainlink for? And why will it bring value to the Chainlink token? Last I heard I think it was some sort of proof of concept for trading stocks or something

>>53160072
Interesting, but what does it mean for the general Swift migration roadmap?
Originally the BoE migration was planned to really start in March 2023 and run empty before.

Does this mean multiple big central banks are going to migrate sooner at the same time to this new system?
How is this related with the CCIP release delay?

Did the release date for CCIP and the Swift blockchain support get delayed and at the same time get more initial customers for its release?

Is there going to be an announcement of the CCIP integration around March?
Is this why we get the current mass fud because we are close to it?

>>53160202
All Swift operations using blockchains and digital currencies would use CCIP.
Chainlink's network income would x100-1000 instantly the moment a central bank started to support a digital currency and/or tokenized debt bonds.

Chainlink started as a project to connect banks to the blockchains and this was their main goal since the start because of the gigantic profitability.

Dude Chainlink will never be used
I have 1k stacklet just in case but seriously, i dont believe in this project
Plus im pretty sure Sergey is a scammer

>>53160260
>Chainlink's network income would x100-1000 instantly the moment a central bank started to support a digital currency and/or tokenized debt bonds.
this could explain the delay testing and little info we get.
>Is there going to be an announcement of the CCIP integration around March?
the product would need a lot of testing before release do you think this happens already? I remember snx using some ccip alpha in testing last year.
also,
>https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-accepts-community-request-start-iso-20022-migration-march-2023
the delay would explain the ccip release delay and more importantly the eneterprise portion that might get released simultaniously. This explains why ccip and enterprise portion was not released last year. However chainlink could have made this more clear.

>>53160367
The roadmap said there would be a phase when different messages are migrated over 6 months after March.
The secondary services would be released after this starting from October 2023.

A proof of concept technically already works but needs more development and testing to do everything properly.

This delay didn't affect anything related to the date for this integration, only the initial BoE "empty "integration which was supposed to last until March and got cancelled for a real migration start with other banks at the same time in March.

I don't really know if this caused a delay for CCIP, but it caused a delay for the initial announcement at least because the official migration start has been delayed to March 2023 from October 2022 even if the real integration date of March 2023 never changed.

It's a bit dangerous to expect the CCIP integration to happen instantly and would be best to use the secondary service integration date as the reference in Octobre 2023.
The question then is if the Swift migration in March causes some announcements.

You have to announce the support of CCIP a few month before real integration to allow the banks to prepare for it.

>>53160260
What Swift operations use blockchains? And what blockchains do they use?

>>53157999
its already here

>>53157999
Checked. Its ready to go. Will be released when the big mac gives the nod. Could happen any day. White hats are in control. Trust the process.
Q.

niggers tongue my anus, CCIP IN MARCH

BLEED

>>53160853
Healthy. Organic. Real. #RAW

>Words, words, words
>SELL SIR DO THE BASTARD NEEDFUL RIGHT NOW
>Cope
All link threads are rehashes of one another.

>>53160625
They can use every blockchain with CCIP.
There will be a blockchain which is reserved for the central bank and banks of a country and there will be a blockchain used for international settlements.
This could be Ethereum.

The goal of blockchains is to make the banking system transparent.
To reach this goal every banking asset will have to be tokenized.
Debt, property, fiat money.
This will allow instant auditing of banks and improve the stability of the system.

>>53157999
some chainlink partners already using an alpha version on testnets
early build publicly released next smartcon
t. actual insider

>>53160970
are you the spoonfeed anon or someone else?

>>53160260
>All Swift operations using blockchains and digital currencies would use CCIP
when? In March? In the middle of a bear market?

>>53161133
will swift use link at all?

The stake is only meaningful if it's done by network actors, doing some work, or providing a service, as a security deposit.

Useless staking is gigantic proof that a project has SHIT TOKENOMICS aka token not needed aka Token cash grab.
In the same vein, burning tokens is also a sign of weakness.

>>53160040
Literally not relevant in any way - but no sense discussing it when you would know if you just read one article on iso200022, so instead we'll just wait for march to pass and you to cope with your own retardation.

>>53161133
I have so little faith that i believe this unironically.

>>53161133
>one more smartcon

>>53161392
Their secondary service integration starts from October 2023.
There is a migration period from March to September when the legacy systems are migrated.

This means CCIP can be integrated starting from this date which means announcements a few months before when they are ready to add this feature.
As always don't underestimate the ability for banks to delay, but the CCIP integration should be very simple for already migrated ISO20022 systems.

The bonus is that multiple banks are going to migrate at the same time which will make a big initial user base the day it is released.

>>53159272
Kek this is the single best staking related fud I’ve seen. Great to see you back Uncle

>>53161939
Uncle Oldfag has lost the mandate of heaven

>>53159272
best poster on /biz/.

>>53162386
>>53162662
The more he seethes and the more you screech, the happier I become. There's literally nothing you can do. The real question is; in 8-11 months time, when staking unlocking begins.. do you think you;ll be able to persuade me then? Best of luck.

>>53162786
you won't be alive in 8-11 months.

>>53157999
March 2023

>>53158485
lmao they are really unhinged

>>53162662
>>53159301
>>53161939
Samefagging schizo

>>53158147
>How much bad the current investor mood is

Staking not needed. CCIP not needed. Token not needed.

this year
i had a dream where i watched LINK rocket to $100, i had similar premonitions before the $60 pump

>>53157999
Who cares? None of it matters anymore. All the other chains are dying, and tvl on eth is also melting. Turns out no one is actually using defi when there's no vc funded ponzi yield farm in a high rates and regulated environment and all VCs either ran with the money or lost it to the kike.

>>53163174
>before the $60 pump
This happened in your dream or another universe?

>>53161748
will the price pump in the bear market? Normies don't pump this coin, if it was ada it would have pumped to 100$

>>53162386
kek since this is an old Chyna belief, you must be

>>53163715
The reason people were afraid to sell this token is because it pumped multiple times with no news and hype from insider trading.
It can happen again and if it does you may miss out from a good entry and have to buy at a 50-100% higher price 1 day later.

>>53160557
>muh banks are gonna buy my bags
you retards still shilling this narrative... LMAO
This is what OGs used to sucker in newfags. All the OGs sold at $50 and retired meanwhile you newfags with your puny 1-10k stacks provided ecit liquidity.
There were retards saying shit like
>im still buying at $50 im basically stealing at these prices haha link is so chwap! its going to 1k eoy hur durrr
the people who shilled this narrative had 6 figure stacks bought at 20 cents. Only hopium stacklets actually bought into this pump narrative. Ahahahahhaha

>>53164351
When and what price are you going to sell your link tokens?

>>53160970
I'm asking what specific blockchains is Swift using? Their own or otherwise? Do they use hyperledger or any other blockchain for anything?

This movie is about Sergei, his business model and ethics, and his six-sided blue jew token.

>>53161584
>wait for march
March lines up with that 10-12 weeks of... i cant recall exactly... either fed or swift (or both?) cbdc pilot from December

>>53164705
There may be something else happening but it would of course still be irrelevant to the iso200022 messaging standard. I would also say a CBDC pilot of any sort will of course not be something that's enacted any time soon after test completion, CBDCs are important infrastructure that will be tested, retested, audited, trialled, bills passed etc etc.

CCIP Version 0.01 will be released on December 31st at 11:59 PM

>>53164868
Add. Another. Zero.

Announcing CCIP v0.0.0.1. Coming this December.

>>53163317
oh yea, also my link is all staked, so i can't sell

>>53164576
The discussion has been about integrating with any public blockchain. They don't want to commit to any one in particular and this is why they are so interested in CCIP as it will achieve that, in theory (and I suspect, in tests)

>>53159244
lol, seething replies. Any positive sentiment about llink is immediately swamped with replies by fudders. They really want people to sell.

>>53157999
December 31, 12:59:59 2024

>>53159662
and shitty mutt breakdancing