What if Chainlink made an L1

[Anonymous No.56577934]

How underexposed would you be if the biggest and most secure decentralized infrastructure provider made a a highly competitive and performant L1 which large financial institutions universally accepted and preferred as they moved into the tokenization and world of smart contracts.

Personally I'd be longing rope since there's clearly not enough

[Anonymous No.56577951]

It’s over for L1s

[Anonymous No.56578103]

>>56577934
it's not an L1

[Anonymous No.56578128]

>>56577934
All they would have to do is make Chainlink services prioritize, and maybe throw in a tiny discount on BBCA chain. Chainlink would swallow the totality of all smart contract value overnight. I would imagine they are saving that move for after SWIFT is fully committed to CCIP… i would imagine…

[Anonymous No.56578139]

>>56578128
the point is to link chains not be the chain

[Anonymous No.56578153]

>>56578103
BBCA is absolutely an L1. It's a fast finality DAG ledger with MEV resistant properties.

[Anonymous No.56578171]

>>56577934
>decentralized infrastructure provider
You might be retarded

[Anonymous No.56578185]

>>56578153
I don't think so
>>56578171
agreed. chainlink is not really decentralized. I think we should stop talking about this

[Anonymous No.56578192]

>>56578139
Chainlink is a suite of services. Also, which chain would you rather use; one from a company with a 100% no-failure record or something like Sol which has failed numerous times? Tough one, that...

[Anonymous No.56578204]

>>56578139
I would agree that's the point of CCIP.

But Chainlink makes more than CCIP. They develop the node software which runs every Chainlink node which provides for every Chainlink service (feeds, VRF, functions, etc)

Why would a lightweight DAG-as-a-service using in-house developed architecture be something they couldn't and wouldn't develop and turn into a product?

[Anonymous No.56578231]

>>56578185
it's an L1, nigger

[Anonymous No.56578245]

>>56578192
>>56578204
>>56578231
that's very imaginative. but let's remember what chainlink is about. they've never said they wanted to run a blockchain and instead have stated they want to work together with public and private chains. I think we should focus on that and forget that this thing in op exists

[Anonymous No.56578312]

>>56578139
And then once they link all the chains, the come out with their own chain, for which that link between all chAins works better by design. They then have control of the entiRe stack, top to bottom… in thIs totally hypothetical scenario…

[Anonymous No.56578314]

>>56578245
Chainlink Labs will undoubtedly develop and meet the demand of their customers, especially their largest and most transformative clients.

Chainlink started and was "about" price feeds. The capabilities of Chainlink networks has evolved as the direction of the company and needs of its users has.

[Anonymous No.56578359]

>>56578231
>>56578153
It's not a L1 (which is pointless anyway, chainlink goal is offchain), it's a new consensus method for the OCR of DONs.
I'm not sure yet because rhey haven't been really explicit about it but I think it's what enable data stream (aka high frequency oracles)

[Anonymous No.56578558]

>>56578359
>>56578245
>high-throughput
>low latency
>MEV resistance
obviously designed as an L1, read the whitepaper. OCR only needs a simple BFT ledger, not BBCA. they didn't build it for that.

>but Chainlink labs can only focus on one thing at a time (offchain only!!!)
retarded argument

[Anonymous No.56579043]

>>56578204
"competition is for losers" - peter thiel
i always assumed bbca was to keep an ordering of oracle events, ccip events, etc. across all chainlink networks & to make resolving DON conflicts straightforward. for example, as RWAs come online and their state needs to be updated periodically, bbca can store a record of every update. bbca is public, and so in the spirit of transparency, events on the chainlink network will be open and public just like events on any L1

an L1 to compete with other L1s is just reinventing the wheel & will only capture a % of marketshare anyways, never the whole thing, so there's no point. Sergey wants to take one bite and swallow an entire market before anyone even realizes there was a competition

[Anonymous No.56579314]

>>56578312
hi ari

[Anonymous No.56579476]

>>56578558
nice image and yes I agree
Not only are we the interop layer, lmao we are now likely to be the layer 1 that banks actually put their assets on.
We're literally going to 1k

[Anonymous No.56579679]

>>56577934
BBCA will be cloned by banks as private chains with easy access to Chainlink services

[Anonymous No.56579691]

Chainlink is a Decentralized Oracle Network not a Layer One LMAO

Who pays you to post this mentally unhinged FUD OP?

[Anonymous No.56579752]

[Anonymous No.56579890]

>>56578185
>I don't think so
Look up what DAGs are anon in the blockchain field.

[Anonymous No.56579973]

>>56578245
Every CISO and CFO in the world wants platform services right now instead of multiple vendors. They want to consolidate and Chainlink would be the odd one out if they didn’t also follow this market trend

[Anonymous No.56580020]

>>56579043
bbca will solve MEV. that's why there are 2 layers. the happy layer receives every chains inputs, the sad layer resolves them

[Anonymous No.56580086]

>>56580020
bbca is a trash collector

[Anonymous No.56580384]

>>56580086
Just like your mom’s smelly gash

[Anonymous No.56580594]

>>56577934
>>56578153
what are the purposes of this device?