Why is Chainlink development taking so long?

[Anonymous No.49884508]

The only functional part of Chainlink right now are price feeds and they don't even require the LINK token. The token has as much utility as Shiba. What am I missing?

[Anonymous No.49884662]

You’re missing a brain

[Anonymous No.49884717]

>>49884508
>What am I missing?
1. Chainlink aims for staking to be non inflationary and instead be provided by actual customer fees. Feeds have been subsidized in the boodstrapping phase, now that networks are reaching profitability and Chainlink network has grown to high risk high value levels, staking incentive and loss protection mechanisms can find user demand. Chainlink services are driven by customer demand, feedback and highest of security requirements. New features releases get prioritized by actual user demand and market conditions.

2. Chainlink network already secures tens of billions across hundreds of protocols, it's at its core a security protocol on which the entire blockchain ecosystem rests upon. A single code upgrade requires extreme precaution and months in auditing process. Chainlink isn't allowed a single fuck up since adoption is already live and underpinning many critical protocols. New features releases need to be slow and meticulous by design.

[Anonymous No.49884720]

>>49884508
stop asking questions

[Anonymous No.49884757]

>>49884508
I'm actually more qualified to talk about this than most anons.I'm employed with a cyber-techno machinations company, I do a lot of security analyst programming type work. Open source, decentralized, APIs, partnerships, you name it. We'd be one of the first companies in line for something like Chainlink, if the decentralized smart contract space had more value over traditional data exchanges. There's a catch though, an underlying flaw more deeply embedded in the bedrock of LINK than the very code itself. The flaw is with the concept, and it's this: Companies won't actually go through the hassle of trusting their data API's through crypto.

Now I can already hear your keyboards going frantic, but hear me out. /biz/ hates banks, and traditional data providers. But actual companies, businesses, and investors do not. There's an old saying you might have heard of: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!". The idea that any of our bosses would give us the go ahead if we approached them to put our companies valuable data in a smart contract on a cryptocurrency called Chainlink, that they've never heard of, we'd be laughed out at best and fired on the spot at worst. We already have API data buyers and providers we trust.

'But Chainlink is trustless!' I hear you cry, but is that really a good thing? Just listen to the sound of it. Businesses don't want to spend millions of dollars on something that is trustLESS, they want something trustFUL. 'But the reputation system!', doesn't that defeat the whole point of your coin? If companies only trust nodes with high reputation, what's the difference between trusting banks and data providers that already have reputation, but in real life not on a computer screen.

The fact is, LINK is going to share the same fate as ETH will. A lot of 'real world application' hype, with a lot of 'crypto world application' reality. Only, this billion supply coin isn't going to come close to the $1k that Etherum hit.

[Anonymous No.49885081]

Rome wasnt built in a day.

Chainlink development is only percieved to be slow because it is an actual project which many people rely on keeping their money safe. everyone is used to fake vaporware projects which hype up roadmaps while not actually building anything. Most chains are not used for anything and are just copy pasted ghost chains.
Chainlink is one of the only real projects in crypto, that is why its such a black sheep.

This is not your typical
>omg were building an nft platform! Stay tuned for updates were almost done! Moon soon!!!

Google took 20 years to develop.

[Anonymous No.49885420]

>>49884662
https://docsend.com/view/nfrvnyuuzrf2d5va
>>49884717
>non inflationary
The token needs to be nearly worthless for this to be practical because users will be charged per each data request.
>security
What's to stop me from setting up 10,000 different data providers that initially provide good data to get a good reputation score, but then slowly corrupt them over time? It doesn't matter how many data providers you average if I can set up millions of them in seconds. I don't see any way to solve Sybil attacks here.
>secures tens of billions
You're right but at this stage Chainlink has no use outside Defi and if Defi fails it will bring Chainlink down with it.

[Anonymous No.49885585]

>>49884508
because it is a scam simple as the fat man has expanded himself at the expense of the neets. his eating threatens my very way of life

[Anonymous No.49885603]

>>49885420
18 decimals nigger

top tier rep + amount staked is how security is measured
how much are you going to stake on that bad data you just provided?

disingenuous fud, gtfo of here

[Anonymous No.49885747]

>>49884757
Interedasting. I don't see smart contracts as practical either because at the end of the day you still require a human mind to interpret what might be some vague definition in the contract. We wouldn't have courts, judges and lawyers if contracts could be properly defined without any ambiguity. The use-cases are limited beyond price feeds. Maybe election data?
The entire economic model is flawed though. LINK must be dirt cheap for high frequency data requests to occur. And if only one data provider exists for some given situation, then that's the correct data by default. Why would you pay then? And Chainlink controlling who gets to become a node is very anti-Satoshi.

[Anonymous No.49885773]

>>49885603
what does that even mean?

[Anonymous No.49885810]

>>49885747
and now you’re replying to ancient copypasta, idk why i even try anymore

*ahem*
MY LINKY STAYS SUPER STINKY 1000 DOLLARS EOY

[Anonymous No.49885844]

>>49885747
This

[Anonymous No.49885887]

>>49884508
Are the servers of this game still active? I used to like it.

[Anonymous No.49885965]

>>49885810
Based

[Anonymous No.49885988]

The primary reason for Chainlink's development timeline is the need for security audits. Since Chainlink is building on top of Ethereum, which is itself still in development, it is important to make sure that the smart contracts that Chainlink is building are secure and will not be exploited by malicious actors. Security audits can be very time-consuming, so this is a major factor in why Chainlink's development is taking longer than some other projects.

[Anonymous No.49886024]

>>49884508
external adaptors are just as important, finished, and used as price feeds

[Anonymous No.49886104]

>>49884757
This. Chainlink Labs as a business doesn't make sense as a crypto. The crypto aspect of it was shoehorned in to get seed capital.

[Anonymous No.49886112]

>>49885810
Based.
WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER

DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF POSITIVE THOUGHT! ESPECIALLY COLLECTIVE POSITIVE THOUGHT!

THIS TOKEN IS GOING TO REACH $1,000 EASILY!
HOLD THAT THOUGHT AND VISUALIZE IT IN YOUR MIND EVERYDAY AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE STARTING NOW AND IT WILL MANIFEST INTO REALITY. DO IT! I'M NOT JOKING!

VISUALIZE AS OFTEN AND AS DETAILED AS POSSIBLE!

[Anonymous No.49886135]

>>49884508
>The only functional part of Chainlink right now are price feeds and they don't even require the LINK token

And keepers, and VRF. And if you do want to have the price feed post to chain you do need to pay in link token.

Where the fuck do you think the fees on market.link come from? Or the payouts in linkpool?

[Anonymous No.49886251]

>>49884508
EVERY SINGLE OTHER ORACLE HAS HAD A FAILURE except LINK. They value security over everything. That's why.

[Anonymous No.49886256]

this is all bullshit

[Anonymous No.49886347]

>>49884508
Don't ask questions
Just watch Smartcon and then get excited for next Smartcon

[Anonymous No.49886807]

>>49884717
>>49884757
>>49885081
Why shouldn't I swing trade LINK all the way up? It's so simple. Buy at $10 sell at $40. Buy at $20 sell at $60.

[Anonymous No.49886918]

>>49885747
>at the end of the day you still require a human mind to interpret what might be some vague definition in the contract.
Good morning sirs, you will use kleros court

[Anonymous No.49887143]

>>49884757
>an OG appears

[Anonymous No.49887145]

>>49884508
>>49884662
>>49884717
>>49884720
>>49884757
>>49885081
>>49885420
>>49885585
>>49885603
>>49885747
>>49885773
>>49885810
>>49885844
>>49885887
>>49885965
>>49885988
>>49886024
>>49886104
>>49886112
>>49886135
>>49886251
>>49886256
>>49886347
>>49886807
>>49886918
Sorry for the mass reply.

[Anonymous No.49887379]

most of the shills in here forgot that arbitrum was required for any of this to work. it was never going to work on eth. arbitrum has taken forever which really impacted serg's timeline

also, lack of enterprise interest. no one wants this shit, it'll take 10 years to adopt

[Anonymous No.49887501]

>>49884757
>Companies won't actually go through the hassle of trusting their data API's through crypto.

They might, if the process involves sharing a payment between some group, related to some kind of data.

Let's say for example I want to trigger an insurance based on a smart contract. Instead of going through the hassle of having a bunch of lawyers and all the bureaucracy involved with insurance, I can only have the funds in a smart contract and use chainlink to trigger it based on some offchain condition. It's way more practical and transparent. Complex payment distributions are also relatively easier to do in Solidity than in most payment APIs, so a bunch of other cases apply to it as well.

>t. software developer doing something related to Chainlink in a health company

[Anonymous No.49887551]

>>49885747
>And Chainlink controlling who gets to become a node is very anti-Satoshi.

What do you mean by that? Anyone can run a node and configure external adapters in it. Chainlink does not have control on who or what spins up a node.
They might not list everyone in the chainlink marketplace, but this doesn't make it impossible to make a contract have functions fulfilled from a node.

>LINK must be dirt cheap for high frequency data requests to occur.

It depends on the node fulfilling the request and how the node operator configures the price to be honest.

[Anonymous No.49887605]

>>49885420
>The token needs to be nearly worthless for this to be practical because users will be charged per each data request.
there are LINK/ETH and LINK/USD price feeds for this very reason anon. an SLA can denominate its request prices using a completely different currency and consume an equivalent amount of link whenever a request is made