/biz/ - Business & Finance

Crypto is dead. No new money coming = no new users.

>>56291645
Almost this: crypto was never alive in the first place.

But the subject is CCIP Revenue: it's not growing, because THE DEMAND FOR IT IS EXTREMELY LOW. I know Linktards are dreaming about interoperability and taking fees on institutional transfers or some shit, but really, it's niche as fuck. Almost no one needs it.

No one gives a shit.
>but we have gambling and gaming!
People can gamble and game without crypto, without dapps, without sex and the games are better.
>oh, well that's just objective.
Name one fucking crypto game even half as good as Tetris, that someone would actually want to play.
hard mode: isn't pay-to-win.
>...
I'll be waiting.

>>56291701
I tried discussing this with people here but everyone is either married (to death) to their bags, or retarded as fuck.

My thesis is now this: Crypto is relevant for MONEY and EFFICIENT DATA INFRASTRUCTURE.

MONEY = BTC & XMR, very relevant, for obvious reasons

EFFICIENT INFRA = Scalable networks for large-scale tracking (VeChain style)
Any network using crypto for: 1) automation of interactions, rewards & participation (aka PROTOCOLS for useful stuff in the modern world, like Uber, Airbnb, etc)
Example:
Data Analytics Network (Exorde, unironically)
Information networks

>>56291614
What is the actual use case? What is the actual demand for using any of this crypto?

>>56291614
general access not open

>>56291678
It’s in an extremely limited beta you retard

>>56291701
I've never understood this whole pay to play gaming shit. When I used to game it was supposed to be an escape from everything to have fun, not try to run a fucking business. Crypto truly is a solution desperately in need of a problem

>>56291894
blablabla

it's not a limited beta, it's the demand that's extremely limited lmao.
SHOW ME PROOFS OR FACTS ABOUT THE DEMAND FOR INTER CHAIN TRANSFERS OF DATA OR VALUE

SHOW ME Lmao

No one wants to do that, it's bad design simple as that. The entire financial system could run on Algorand, agree on that, and it would be extremely secure AND THAT IS A FUCKING FACT

>>56294439
it's permissioned with less than five projects live but 70 are currently integrating including sushiswap:
https://www.sushi.com/blog/sushi-boosts-cross-chain-swap-with-chainlink-ccip-integration-1
i know you know this but yeah

in saying that it was disappointing we didn't get a general access announcement at smartcon, coming before end of year though

crypto is dead. kikestream killed it in 2017 with their tiny block hijack, and the hordes of NPC niggercattle cheered it on, having absolutely no understanding of what was going on

>>56291842
the demand is in dangling the carrot in front of people who overestimate their intelligence. if you were in charge of manufacturing the illusion of a new financial paradigm, allowing you to legally offload a digital asset you pulled out of your digital ass over several years... would you not?

>>56291614
If you don't understand why, you are way too involved with chainlink. So many link marines do nothing on chain and it shows. There is nothing to do with ccip right now. Seriously, almost nothing. All those integrations are honestly probably 6 months to year away from being somewhat useful

>>56294667
>2 year test net
>8 months main net
>nobody can name a single dapp with users using Chainlink oracles in production
>(with proof link to dapp.com/dappradar/etherscan)
>Linkers: this is bullish!

>>56291775
>crypto
>efficient data infrastructure
lol
lmao even

>>56291775
This. It's settlement infrastructure. especially for forward contracts in situations where the SEC is dragging their feet or you need something OTC and can be sure of behavior.

>>56291882

>>56294484
>coming before end of year though
yeah I've heard that fucking bullshit before

>>56291614
because it will happen when all financial institutions have their own avax subnet / eth rollup and they need to transfer assets between chains. not the case for now

>>56291614
>is this data just wrong?
Eric Wall(ack) is a long time LINK fudder and you wonder why his data is corrupt? Just how retarded are you?

>>56294988
Why do shitbrains always say this when chainlink always delivered on their promises?

>>56295117
You're talking to someone who has clinical depression, which means they can instantly recall every tiny mistake and failure from Chainlink in the last 6 years, while glossing over every single spectacular success and rendering it meaningless in their own mind.

>>56291775
how do you feel about layerzero?

>>56295117
yeah it's happening like next month you fucking turbo nigger kys

>>56295132
successes for chainlink (the company) are completely irrelevant to chainlink (the token), as you can see on the chart

>>56295249
But what if I get pleasure from both? What if Kemal's talk at SmartCon made me as happy and excited as a big green candle?

>>56294439
Noone uses Algorand and they never will, congrats on being exit liquidity for a VC scam

>>56291614
https://twitter.com/ThoughtsFromH/status/1709942186496905225

>100k cumulative revenue after 3 months
>This is with only a few projects in general access
>Over 70 projects in CCIP testnet

>>56294688
I regularly use GMX, Compound/AAVE, Curve and Uniswap.
Now everything is moving on L2s it's becoming a headache with fragmentation.
For example GMX is straight up Arbitrum only (I mean it's on AVAX too but noone uses it), Uniswap has a lot of liquidity on both Arbitrum and Ethereum so it's alright but Compound has next to nothing on Arb so while it's cheaper to use apps gas wise you get fucked on moving back and forth with bridge fees.
So let's say you want to get wETH out of Compound, use it on GMX to set a long, close it, swap it in USDC and putting it back in Compound you have at least a dozen of tx to make and you get fucking raped on bridge fees (which are in % instead of fixed).
And that's all using very primitive contracts in the grand scheme of thing.

The only solution to this is I can see is having a centralized front-end per app you connect to your wallet and CCIP automatically routes all the transactions in the most cost-effective and time-effective way for you among the various rollups and chains.

Btw I believe much more in this actually pumping the token than an all the meme PoCs from banks who never led to anything in 7 years. I say that because many retard "marines" are anti-defi/ethereum not realizing that's where the money is. Once you corner that market, forcing everyone developing a defi app to use CCIP as the foundation you won't need banks pie in the sky bullshit because you will already have a finger in EVERY pie. A bit like Microsoft became so big by having the Windows installed in every single PC sold in the world.

>>56291894
AHAHAH CRY MORE BAGGIE

tick tock linkies

Avax will flip your not needed token very soon

>>56295562
kek imagine taking an absolutist all-or-nothing stance where Defi good/banks nothingburger, that's as irrational as the opposite.
Chainlink will operate across both, and eventually there won't even be a "both". Just a big old internet of contracts powered by... you know the rest.

>>56295803
I will believe it only when I see it, up to now all those institutions have talked a lot and not done much at all.
All those people you see doing speeches and poc with crypto/blockchain startups very rarely have actual skin in the game, they do meetings, talk, visit conferences, launch "initiatives" and all that shtick, pretending to do something until they get an internal promotion or branch to another company.

Meanwhile DeFi protocols with billions in TVL have been launched by randos in a garage and the industry is almost completely grassroot (if you ignore the VC scams who all wither in few months anyway).

Leshner (Compound Founder) recently said that institutions aren't particularly eager about partaking in DeFi or buy whatever token to use as gas or collateral. Call me paranoid but I'm not completely sold either on the fact banks start using LINK for CCIP on their interbank/permissioned chains trading instead of some homemade stable (see Ripple), it will all rely on whether Sergey is docile about or tell them to fuck off and that it's not negotiable.

t. AXA wagie

>>56295944
You sound like you're either a fudder or just retarded.

>>56295944
>I'm not completely sold either on the fact banks start using LINK for CCIP on their interbank/permissioned chains trading instead of some homemade stable
That's a weird comment, because LINK isn't acting as the cross-chain collateral asset, but just as the infrastructure for moving assets interchain.
That's essentially what Sergey has been saying for the last month. That banks will, to the greatest degree possible, keep things in-house and keep direct control over as much infrastructure as possible, but you can't keep intercommunication in-house by definition, you need a neutral mechanism for various liquidity siloes to communcate, and that's absolutely unequivocally Chainlink at this point.
But yes, it's probably a few years out, yes DeFi is way cooler because it's much more tied to the open source grassroots ethos, and yes, DeFi eating a larger slice of the tradfi pie would be desirable, I don't disagree with any of that.
In the short term it's really up to DeFi/Web3 to demonstrate how well they can compete, knowing that the incumbents are now fully engaged with building out their own solutions (but which will take a while).

>>56295562
>I regularly use GMX, Compound/AAVE, Curve and Uniswap.
You sound like an insufferable faggot

>>56295985
>nooo you can't use defi you have to store all your money on FTX, lose it, and then say defi is a scam because you never learned how it works

>>56295117
>>56295117
sergey said staking was around the corner in 2019 and that ccip would be out EOY in 2022. not too mention constantly inventing new projects before ever finalizing any old ones.

>>56295117
bait

>>56296092
>I did absolutely nothing with my life and it’s Sergey’s fault!

>>56295985
>>56295960
Whatever brainlets, go back posting frogs on twitter.

>>56295980
The demo we've seen with the food was using lanes between public sidechains and rollups. Unless I missed something during the presentations we're yet to have seen an example using a permissioned DLTs.
The ANZ guy seemed to be the most open about using crypto because he implied the higher value the transactions were (like multibillion settlements), the more secure you would like the chain to be, which implies you would do that on a public chain like Ethereum.

But there have been little details on the CCIP DON committees in their experiments and more importantly on the Risk Management nodes collaterals they used for SWIFT. The only thing known is that the billing can be done with whatever token is set (with lower billing if you use LINK).