/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>54647480
why cant i search google for chainlink questions

>>54647508
(((they))) crashed Google to suppress ChainLink

>>54647508
Can't believe They took down the entire Google just to stop me from reading about ChainLink

>>54647480
decentralized architecture with independent nodes, reputation, incentives and transparency.

>>54647586
i mean lets say we both own a node

you plug in some shitty answer from google

I plug in some shitty answer from google

We both validate its good

get paid

e z

>>54647597
>you plug in some shitty answer
I'm not you. I want a superb reputation, uptime and decentralized sources to attract high value customers to more likely include my node and services so I can get paid more than you.
Your shitty node withers and dies and mine is growing bigger, tl;dr you are fired.

>>54647652
so youre saying the only way to verify the data integrity is if a majority of the network are able to get good data?

I'm thinking from an average lazy man's perspective, not from someone with morals

if enough "lazy" nodes are on the network provide "good enough" data then it will be accepted right?

sorry im an idiot

>>54647735
the entire process is very transparent and everyone can see that you are the lazy man.
Nodes are competing and if your service is good you earn more, if its bad you arent gonna be profitable.
do you not understand how incentives work?
do you know what a reputation is?
>then it will be accepted right?
no, why should anyone accept shitty service?

>>54647508
so, is chainlink a good investment?

>>54647882
because if all nodes are "shitty" then they are all on the same standard.

>>54648022
Checked. Yes. It's a very good investment. If you are patient and can wait a few years you will see extremely strong returns. It has highest upside of any crypto in the top 100.

>>54648218
>if all nodes are "shitty"
but they arent on the same standard, thats the point. you want to be the best performing node with the best reputation and there exist incentives for this.
is that so hard to understand?

>>54648218
That’s the assumption that bodes are decentralized. More nodes the better

>>54648333
Don’t be such a nigger. He’s just curious and desu it’s not easy to understand

>"chainlink are trans women real women?"
>source dr shekelburgs new peer reviewed study saying yes
>cant deny science
>chuds btfo

>>54648218
Anon the best nodes are going to be from already reliable sources for the data required, any new nodes will be then competing with those experts. Take weather for example: Accuweather have a node, naturally, they are already going through all the trouble of tracking, charting and collating weather data. To setup a node and sell this data through that is basically free money. The guys at the Met Office, the UK's official meteorological research group, which has been providing weather data for the British government and the BBC for decades, see this and decide to do the same. Again, they're already doing all the hard work, why not go the extra mile and setup a node and sell the data. Now there are two very high quality weather nodes with 99.99% uptime and a proven track record of providing expert-level meteorological data. This is quickly followed by a flurry of other organisations doing the same thing, from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in America to the Central Weather Bureau in China. There now exists a network of globe-spanning nodes being provided by the world's best institutions for collating data on the weather. The bar has already been set. Where does your low-quality node come in? Why would anybody use it? You can set one up but it isn't going to get any jobs.
You can expand this for basically any field or industry you like. If it there is money to be made in tracking it, it is being tracked, and if there is even more money to be made in selling the data, it is being sold. When Chainlink comes along and offers another even more efficient outlet to sell said data nobody is going to say no, certainly not when your competitors are already doing so. Once there are a few nodes in place for any industry that are being run by the already trusted institutions in that space others will rush in to compete for the remaining jobs. Nobody, at that point, is going to care what some neet node has to say.

>>54648424
This is happening anyway. All that is going to change is that it will be recorded on chain in an immutable ledger and the data will be manipulable by smart contracts. What is being recorded here isn't 'trans women are real women', it's 'these specific doctors say trans women are real women'. Their consensus is being recorded, that is. If you had a node that tracked the opinion of Dr. Chud MD you could bring his scientific 'proof' on-chain that 'Trannies are demented freaks who multiply by touching children'.
The fact that a node has brought these two papers on-chain doesn't make either of them true, it simply records their contents.

>>54647508
Eric Schmidt has hidden Chainlink from the Google in order to employ the hiding strategy for Chainlink for 7 more years

>>54647735
"Good enough" lasts untill the price feed fucks up a little and leaves room for Ari to destroy your whole exchange.

obvious fat russian man is obvious

>>54648337
that part i get, i guess i was wondering whats the incentive to be the considered the "best" node? more people use you and thus better payment?

>>54648519
this was really good. truely helped me understand oracles. they're centralized, but decentralized. That's what I didn't get. I thought it was Greg hosting a node inputting data from somewhere competing against Jeff whos also hosting a node, and so both of them just settle on a "shitty" cheap solution. similar to how governments fall into complacency

The example with the data source being an oracle competing against other large data sources. This helps.

just bought 10k thanks

>>54647480

Damn this post made me realize how long we've been on this fucking journey. In 2017-2018 we discussed all these topics to death. Fucking assblaster. I talked with him in a thread. Feels like I had coffee with Moses or something.

>>54648519
How have companies not realized they can sell their data on the block chain??? Whats the catch theyre missing?

>>54649714
Yeah I mean I remember those days I never went into the threads but it caught my curiosity enough that now many years later this is one of the only shit coins ill consider buying besides btc

all the white cubes and fake russian guy really sold me

>>54647480
im not a specialist but here is how i think it would work
when setting up your smart contract you could chose to turn the data source diversity slider all the way up
thats it

>>54649715
Those companies already sell their info off chain. Why would a big company bother until it becomes standard? Even the biggest chains tx’s and profits are meager; the opportunity for big players is very low. Look at BSC with all the liquidity it’s still too small for big fish

>>54649715
The network is in its nascency. There isn't anywhere near the demand for the data on-chain yet. There are lots of tools being developed but until the space matures and we have lots of protocols which are more than just decentralised houses of gambling, which is what 90% of defi is, there's not going to be a need for any real data.
>>54649913
Is basically correct.

Essentially it's just a matter of time now. Sergey's vision has always been: 'build it and they will come', he has reiterated this time and time again. You give devs the tools and they will use those tools to make something special which requires data, which Chainlink will provide, which will incentivise data providers to join the network to sell their data which in turn will encourage more innovation as more and more data is able to be put on-chain and so on and so forth until you have a blooming ecosystem of nodes and protocols all swapping data back and forth.
Chainlink can't really do anything once they have built the tools except sit and wait and hope someone does something good with them. This is why they host so many hackathons.

>>54647597
if the shitty source gets compromised / is buggy the whole system collapses even though validators agree on the result

the more cynical answer is that ChainLink is incentivized to use very expensive sources to boost their rep and gate-keep competitors, kind of like established monopolies pushing for regulations to prevent new market entrants

>>54647597
Yes, that's always a danger. If you just trust that all the nodes are legit, unquestioningly, then there's always a danger of being deceived.
I suppose what you could do is run your own internal "oracle network", i.e. you get the data from a bunch of data sources yourself, but with it being only authoritative to you, and then compare the oracle-data against that.

>>54647480
bump

>>54648333
adding on to this...reputation will eventually be a function of LINK staked on the node. the implications of this is that LINK holders will essentially be voting on the truth depending on where they stake their LINK. it's why they are terrified of this board holding a significant portion of the supply.