/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.13491844]

Genius Tier Programmer Shits all over Chainlink

https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo/blob/master/docs/other_blockchains/chainlink.md


>Zack Hess created one of the first blockchains after Bitcoin

>He has worked with Vitalik Buterin

>He invented the oracle system used in Aeternity and much of it's tech.

>Augur was created by Zack Hess

He's smarter than you, he has more insight than you brainlets ever will and is a highly regarded and respected developer in the crypto-community.

Get rekt Linklets.

[Anonymous No.13491853]

>>13491844
Here comes the linktards who couldn't code out of a paperbag refuting his claims.

[Anonymous No.13491898]

>>13491844
Linkies blown the fck out

[Anonymous No.13491932]

>>13491844
lmao he's already scared that Links is blowing out his literal who project

[Anonymous No.13491940]

>Review by competitor
nice bias

[Anonymous No.13491960]

>pajeet-tier grammar
>fallacious arguments
Is it any surprise that an associate of VB would embarrass himself like this?

[Anonymous No.13491961]

Bets on when this guy's shitcoins bend the knee?

[Anonymous No.13491969]

LINK makes Augur look like dial up modems. He's scared.

[Anonymous No.13491983]

>>13491932
>>13491932
>>13491940
>>13491960
>>13491961
>>13491969
>literally all ad hominems and no-content posts
I see linkies can't actually address any of the criticisms. Tells me all I need to know.

[Anonymous No.13491984]

>>13491969
he doesn't even work on Augur no more u brainlet.

Absolute state of linklets

[Anonymous No.13491989]

>>13491844
What's this redundant word "tier" you parrot. Genius tier, blue tier, stinky tier, dumb tier, funny tier, tier tier. You're so gay be yourself ahahahahahahaha

[Anonymous No.13492011]

>>13491844
This is level 4.1 fud and can kiss my level 3.1 ass.

[Anonymous No.13492023]

>>13491844
Zack Hess also said that BOLT was an amazing project with lots of prospects on the “Off the chain” podcast, and also called LTC “complete garbage”. Looks like his investment advice is pretty crap.

[Anonymous No.13492037]

>>13491844
>>13491853
Kek double posting because no one replied
>>13491898
I bet this is you posting from your phone too

[Anonymous No.13492042]

I hate shitlink but as a solidity dev, I can say Zach Hess is known to be one of the greatest pseuds in our circles, always peddling shitcoin scams

[Anonymous No.13492055]

>>13491983
there's nothing wrong with using ad hominem, Zack

[Anonymous No.13492056]

>>13491983
Then dont buy any Link. Instead spend all your time autistically researching and posting articles about why it's so shit. Who would do such a thing about a token they don't even own?

[Anonymous No.13492059]

>>13491844
1)
The white paper has been out for 1.5 years, did it take this long for him to read it?

2)
Dude is working on a competing project, opinion immediately devalued.

3)
>>13488433
>>13488490

[Anonymous No.13492063]

>>13491844
>level 4.2 oracle systems like chainlink are more expensive and less secure than level 3.2 oracles like @AugurProject and @BitcoinHivemind . Which are less secure and more expensive than level 2.2 oracles like Amoveo.

This reads like it was written by a level 5.3 brainlet larping as a level 1.1 autist.

[Anonymous No.13492068]

>>13491984
Im sure he still has skin in the game. You think anyone would create a token and not hold a giant stack just in case?

[Anonymous No.13492071]

>>13491989
She looks like ogre Fiona

[Anonymous No.13492078]

>>13492056
This.

[Anonymous No.13492085]

>>13492023
So link it the podcast.

Cause i can't find it. Most likely talking out of your ass.
Pic fucking related

[Anonymous No.13492119]

>>13491983
Fuckin dunce

[Anonymous No.13492129]

>>13492085
My mistake, it was Jeremy Gardner who said that. CO-founder of Auger.

[Anonymous No.13492182]

>>13491844

You still dont get it.

Any debate about which project is better then said project is nonsensical at this point. ETH vs ADA vs EOS or LINK vs augur, vs rhombus etc. all bullshit.

Everyone should know by now that its not about building a project. Anyone can build a platform for dapps now. Soon anyone can build an oracle network. But not everyone can can build a user base.

Chainlink has been building a customer base for its oracle network for the past 3 years. They have been building their network to meet standards of which their customers need them to be. What other project has been doing the same?

[Anonymous No.13492218]

>>13491932
>Literal who
Already worth $76 bucks per coin, while Link can't even get back to $0.50.

[Anonymous No.13492235]

>>13492182
None. Chainlink is the standard. Its just a matter of time maybe 12 months maybe 5 years Idk but they clearly won. Its entirely open source and will adapt as things change, while absorbing any competing oracles into its network.

[Anonymous No.13492252]

>>13492056
>gee why would anyone talk shit about a token they don't own
Maybe people don't want to buy an altcoin which is a scam and end up bagholding like you

[Anonymous No.13492257]

>>13492071
Ogre Fiona thick

[Anonymous No.13492296]

A lot of his problems are valid, stacking one security measure on top of another is not a good strategy at all, but I will say that his scenarios are pretty far fetched, such as both centralized entities acting in bad faith, for example. They're definitely security concerns, but blown out of proportion. Fix the reputation shit though sergey

[Anonymous No.13492313]

>>13491844

>Chainlink is a subcurrency on Eth called LINK

dddddddddddddropped.

[Anonymous No.13492334]

>>13492296
You could always argue hypotheticals like "what if the entire world colluded to make x fail", but the fact is chainlink is a step in the right direction towards decentralization. It's also a hell of lot better than what we have now.
I wonder what augur does for their security?

[Anonymous No.13492365]

>>13491844

Wow thats an interesting opinion piece. Crazy how he picked his project as the best.

[Anonymous No.13492369]

>>13492218
Get a load of this brainlet.
>what is tokenomics
>what is market cap
>how to supply/demand
Nigger, VEO has $2,000 trading volume. Its ranked in the 3000’s. Its literally nothing. LINK is a top 50 coin with $5,000,000 trading volume. VEO isnt even on LINKs radar, let alone a direct competitor.

[Anonymous No.13492385]

>>13491844
>He has worked with Vitalik Buterin

oh, like sergey has? very cool.

[Anonymous No.13492393]

>>13492369
buying 100k right now

[Anonymous No.13492400]

>>13492296
You’re missing the point. Link isn’t increasing security by adding on more layers. What it’s doing is allowing a smart contract user to be COMPENSATED in the case of the data failing (putting the onus on the link nodes to provide the correct data or lose their staked link)

I don’t know what solution zack has proposed, need to read through it and am phone posting, but if it doesn’t involve some free market over the data and is some rigid, in built consensus mechanism, it’s probably bullshit

>t. Mit math grad who’s prob better at math than zack

[Anonymous No.13492406]

>>13492068
Trust me, someone that created a shitcoin dumps it first chance they get. Look at Vitalik.

[Anonymous No.13492437]

>>13492369
>falling for that obvious bait

[Anonymous No.13492439]

>>13492252
Learn to read brainlet.

Also Im not bagholding cos i bought most of my link at 25 cents so I'm comfy. Do you even know what bagholding means?

[Anonymous No.13492450]

>>13492218
Literally the definition of a brainless npc tier subhuman. Your parents must be proud you made it through kindergarten two years later then the rest of your class.

[Anonymous No.13492504]

>>13492218
My sides. Thanks for the hearty kek

[Anonymous No.13492637]

>>13491844
the "research paper" about state channels seems fake and him being the first who came up with so many things is laughable

[Anonymous No.13492699]

>>13492085
sounds like an autist I wouldn't take advice from, even if he is a genius

[Anonymous No.13492720]

>>13491940
>>13491983
> babbys first fallacy

Not an ad-hominem. Attacking a persons motives/biases/credibility is a valid criticism and appropriate argument if it is related to the subject matter of the supporting evidence.

So, criticizing a review because the author is involved in a competing project, appropriately calls into question the reliability of the review.

Criticizing a review because the guy went to X school instead of your alma matter is an example of an ad-hom fallacy. Yours is not.

[Anonymous No.13492743]

The thing he has failed to account for is that nothing is perfectly secure, even legacy systems that aren't on blockchain that already trust Intel by running on Intel hardware.

Does the chainlink world improve many things over the current world? Yes.

Is the chainlink world worse in terms of security than the current state of things? No.

[Anonymous No.13492772]

>>13492218
Lol you baited the real brainlets beautifully

[Anonymous No.13492824]

For example, could the government force Intel to compromise it's hardware?

If yes, then why aren't they already doing that right now? Why aren't our banks already compromised?

If this one is a flaw on ChainLink, it's a flaw in everything that isn't ChainLink, too, and isn't a new risk that you get when you start using ChainLink.

And the beauty of chainlink is that you decide how what risks you want to mitigate. Are you afraid of one country compelling oracles to give bad data? Then you can pay a.bunch of oracles.

It all depends on your threat model and risk tolerance.

I am not worried about the NSA hacking Intel to fuck up a 100 million dollar contract. That's a waste for them- have you seen the American defense budget? So if chainlink is safe for a $100 million contract, that's probably good enough for virtually every high value contract. Remember, right now, nothing like chainlink exists for a million-dollar contract, let a lone a 100-million-dollar one. That's already a world of value chainlink has unlocked.

[Anonymous No.13492850]

>>13492218
Doesn't look like a bad buy. Tiny supply tokens usually moon the hardest.

[Anonymous No.13492937]

>>13491844
this is like the CEO of Coca-Cola saying that Pepsi isn't as good as Coca-Cola b/c reasons.

fuck, the LINK fud is getting worse by the day.

[Anonymous No.13492979]

>>13492400
>>13492400
this. LINK is as much an insurance policy as it is an oracle. this makes LINK twice as good as any other current competitor.

[Anonymous No.13493119]

>>13491844
in other news, Visa says Mastercard is shit. Mastercard holders get rekt

[Anonymous No.13493397]

LMAO LINKIES BTFO.

As a coder myself, I see that everything he says is true. If you still hold link at this point you're an idiot.

[Anonymous No.13493533]

>>13492743
>The thing he has failed to account for is that nothing is perfectly secure, even legacy systems that aren't on blockchain that already trust Intel by running on Intel hardware.
>Does the chainlink world improve many things over the current world? Yes.
>Is the chainlink world worse in terms of security than the current state of things? No.

This anon has it right side up.
Autonomous Scripts (aka smart contracts but I think that term is confusing so trying to move away from it) are likely going to start
1) At the enterprise level
2) with standardized, PARAMETERIZABLE transactions, e.g. price of [copper] on [closing date]
3) in HYBRID transactions where part is handled by the automated script and other parts are handled in traditional way.

These big enterprises are gong to move CAREFULLY with this, starting with small pilot projects and learning from there. Nobody at ISDA or government of Singapore or Australian Securities Exchange gives two shits what some programmer writes on github about his "security analysis" in a 5 paragraph report. NOBODY is an "expert" in this space, including--as smart as he is--Buterin because no smart contracts have seen widespread adoption beyond ICOs.

The other anon got it right when he said this is about user base.

Now as to this guy's specific points
1. This appears to be an honest effort to debate in good faith and kudos to him for that.
2. "Luckily I have developed a simple to calculate model for trust https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo/blob/master/docs/basics/trust_theory.md" Lol at this. BRB contacting the chief risk officer at Credit Suisse and security experts like Bruce Schneier to let them know they can stop working -- Zack has figured out a simple model of "trust" so they can all go home.

[Anonymous No.13493550]

3. The Non-spendable reputation actually decreases the security of the oracle, because it increases the financial incentive to participate in retirement attacks.

If there is no way to sell the reputation, and a person wants to retire from being an oracle, then a retirement attack is the only way that they can transform their reputation-value into a spendable form."

The "reputation" he is referring to, I guess, relates to oracle nodes staking link and being paid in link.

Link is NOT non-spendable and this is 100% wrong. Link tokens can be bought and sold for cash on the open market. If someone wanted to "retire" from being an oracle they could just sell their link tokens.

[Anonymous No.13493559]

>>13492937
This is like the jannie at McDonald's saying the cheese in burger King is shit

[Anonymous No.13493582]

>>13491844
HOLY SHIT LINK REALLY IS SHIT WTF

[Anonymous No.13493599]

"Vitalik wrote this great paper explaining how aggregating data from multiple sources does not increase the security of that data."

No one said that aggregating data from multiple sources automatically increases the security of that data. The point is that the link system INCENTIVIZES oracles to provide correct information. Where multiple, independent oracles are each incentivized to provide correct data than absolutely multiple data sources increases the trustworthiness of the data.

Furthermore, Buterin's example is of a rich outsider taking over an existing voting system. "Rich" here is relative. If we are talking about smart derivative where 10 Million is at stake, the participants and the nodes will insist on a large bond, aka, staking -- which they can make arbitrarily high. In addition, as noted, the first of these contracts are likely to be HYBRID contracts. This means that, at first, there will also be judicial oversight.

[Anonymous No.13494298]

brutal

[CMO of bizpill online No.13494502]

>>13493533
>33

blessed post. going into the linkpill archive

[Anonymous No.13494520]

>>13491844
>conclusion: my project and some other literal who bullshit is better
Desperate. Chainlink will own Augur and Hivemind by 2020.

[Anonymous No.13494557]

>>13492979


Yep, and sure enough I just read through the “math” he used for his oracle:


“warning, this math is intense, feel free to skip this section. Users can bet at 50-50 odds on which of the 3 outcomes they think will win. Whichever outcome gets the most bets, and maintains it's lead for a long enough amount of time, wins. If you are uncomfortable with the outcome of an oracle, simply move to a fork of the blockchain that you think is honest. By default, nodes will go with the fork that has the most difficulty, but it is easy to manually tell your node to follow a different fork. The developers promise to maintain the honest fork. Letting users bet helps the situation escalate to the point where it gets the miner's attention. Any honest individual who notices an attack on the oracle can double their money by participating in defense. The Nash equilibrium will be for honest individuals to participate in the defense. Once enough honest individuals participate in the defense, then the oracle will catch the attention of the miners. Yes there is a cost for the miners to keep an eye on the oracle this way, but every time an attack happens, the miners can participate in the defense, and double all their money. This should more than make up for the cost of watching the oracle for attacks. The Nash equilibrium will be for miners to put some effort into watching the oracle for potential cheaters. Therefore, the Nash equilibrium will be an honest oracle. Read more about oracles here“

>believing a simple back of the envelope Nash equilibrium calculation is intense math

>believing all of this could possibly scale on a chain

>believing a true/false Oracle is sufficiently efficient to manage global derivatives

>relying on developers to “promise” to maintain the honest chain (kekd hard at this)

Overall, sort of hacking solution that is inefficient and misses the point of the sort of flexible insurance policy I would want with link.

[Anonymous No.13494682]

>If the hardware manufacturer can break the oracle system, then eventually governments will pass laws to force the hardware manufacturer to break the oracle. They will use excuses like "saving the children", and "preventing criminal terrorism".
The government can break into certain types of intel processors. But realistically they only do this when pursuing a criminal target. So for most purposes your CPU is secure from most attackers.
His categorization system is pretty lacking. Having hardware security will protect you from most attackers 100% of the time, and groups like the government most of the time.
Grouping that into the same bucket as 100% centralized is dishonest, as most of the time the government agencies with that power won't interfere, and could get in trouble if they do.

The CIA with all their resources *could* strongarm a hardware vendor to give out a key, and use that to change the oracle payout of the Super Bowl, and run off with the money.

But in most use cases of an oracle, the risk far outweighs the reward, and that extra security is discouraging the attack, even if not totally mitigating it.

[Anonymous No.13494868]

>>13494682
tl;dr, don't even lock the door because someone could break in the window