It's over Chainlink bros... We lost.

[Anonymous No.56666258]

This is the end.

[Anonymous No.56666270]

SERGAY
BETRAY

[Anonymous No.56666286]

SERGAY BETRAY

[Anonymous No.56666288]

>>56666258
>Check out the video in the link
HE NAMED CHAINLINK WE WON LINK SISTERS

[Anonymous No.56666303]

WAIT, WHY ARE THERE CUBES?!

[Anonymous No.56666388]

>>56666258
Aren't these three Chainlink usecases? What happened there?

[Anonymous No.56666401]

>>56666303
It makes way more sense that JP Morgan would choose LZ because JP are scammers who hate retail, I always thought them using provably fair, good-for-the-world Chainlink was a weird fit

[Anonymous No.56666407]

>Avalanche

[Anonymous No.56666423]

>>56666258
No memeing, why did they not use Chainlink? Christine Moy worked on this for fuck's sake.

[Anonymous No.56666431]

>>56666258
Haha this is so funny advocates were acting all smug Christine Moy is working on this Liink is Link you'll see trust the team. Well they got betrayed once again kek

[Anonymous No.56666432]

>>56666303
>Buy ID
checked

[Anonymous No.56666435]

>>56666303
they're blocks retard it's called a blockchain

>>56666423
it's probably been in the works for a while, layerzero was up and running long before ccip. sucks but it doesn't really mean anything, it's only a poc.

[Anonymous No.56666438]

This is what I suspected, Chainlink is releasing all of these videos and promo now because they got btfo and attempted to save face through false positives. I've never lost respect for someone as much as Sergey, he is the king of grifters and deserves that obese body

[Anonymous No.56666449]

>>56666435
>layerzero was up and running long before ccip

yep, chainlink lost the all interop market because they were too slow once again. So much for the universal gas token when no one uses the network lol

[Anonymous No.56666485]

>>56666449
>yep, chainlink lost the all interop market
okay ranjeesh

[Anonymous No.56666496]

>>56666258
time to pack it up folks.

[Anonymous No.56666497]

>>56666303
It can't be over when your dad is Blackrock's vice president

[Anonymous No.56666509]

>>56666497
Is that Sergeys dad? I remember him being mentioned a while ago

[Anonymous No.56666521]

>>56666497
>Fridman

Shut the fuck up, Sergey's dad is driving a red Lambo in retirement thanks to Sergey's dumps

[Anonymous No.56666524]

Only logical explanation is this was conducted before ccip released. Ben Chan was at a jpm conference this week with lobban and Moy to discuss ccip BTW and they co wrote a whitepaper with Chainlink before so they're obviously working together.

[Anonymous No.56666547]

>>56666435
if the PoC worked, why would they change to Chainlink oracles? this kind of stuff gets set in stone very quickly once they start transacting real value

[Anonymous No.56666590]

>>56666524
>>56666435
This is the kind of cope that has gotten LINK killed. They were too slow, CCIP was due last year according to Sergey's 2021 end of year vid, and now other solutions beat them to the punch. CCIP is still not on public mainnet, and fat boy fucking lied.

[Anonymous No.56666606]

>>56666524
>>56666547
>>56666590
>"Buy / sell orders" communicated cross chain via interoperability solutions

>What’s CCIP

:)

[Anonymous No.56666616]

fuck jews

[Anonymous No.56666624]

>>56666606
There's a huge layer zero logo, that's the interoperability solution. Why do advocates always resort to lying, you will be link's downfall

[Anonymous No.56666627]

>>56666606

Talking about this pic btw
>>56666303

[Anonymous No.56666651]

>>56666270
>>56666286
>>56666388
>>56666401
>>56666423
>>56666431
>>56666435
>>56666438
>>56666449
>>56666496
>>56666524
>>56666547

>To achieve a secure, robust and decentralized messaging protocol, LayerZero offers omnichain dApps the optionality of a variety of oracles and relayers. To realize this goal, we are pleased to announce our integration of industry-standard oracle solution Chainlink as a major milestone in achieving the decentralization of the LayerZero protocol. LayerZero leverages Chainlink’s blockchain-agnostic oracles to provide a best-in-class security option for omnichain dApps.

https://medium.com/layerzero-official/layerzero-integrates-chainlink-oracles-expanding-decentralization-of-the-omnichain-communication-2d9963678483

From LayerZero's whitepaper
> This paper introduced the design and implementation of LayerZero, the first trustless omnichain interoperability platform that does not involve any intermediate transactions. We showed that by leveraging two independent, untrusted off-chain entities, the Oracle and Relayer, LayerZero is able to achieve valid delivery without requiring costly cross-chain state machine replication or intermediary tokens. Our protocol is designed in a way that does not preclude the use of arbitrary relayer services, which ensures that there is no collusion between the Relayer and Oracle. The LayerZero protocol enables native transactions between supported chains, while the novel LayerZero Endpoint design can be easily extended to support any chain. In addition to this, our Endpoint design is lightweight enough to run on expensive Layer 1 chains such as Ethereum without incurring prohibitive costs. We presented a case study of how to implement support for EVM-based chains in LayerZero, using a reference Relayer implementation in conjunction with Chainlink’s decentralized oracle network to enable cross-chain transactions through LayerZero.

https://layerzero.network/pdf/LayerZero_Whitepaper_Release.pdf

[Anonymous No.56666704]

>>56666606
>>56666624
The white paper and technical documentation is saying LayerZero is the interop and cross chain solution. You cult fags are getting btfo in real time

[Anonymous No.56666714]

>>56666624
LayerZero uses Chainlink as their oracle.

Read >>56666651

Fudnigger, your response? :]

[Anonymous No.56666759]

>>56666547
you don't rush to market just because of a successful poc. a successful poc literally means 1 thing, "what we planned to do is possible". obviously you're going to test out other ways as well.
>this kind of stuff gets set in stone very quickly once they start transacting real value
you don't transact real value in a poc

>>56666590
so ccip being in early access mainnet means it's not even out yet but layerzero only being in a poc means they won lmao

[Anonymous No.56666801]

>>56666651
ccip is an interoperability protocol, jpm is using layerzero instead. Yes ok maybe layerzero will use some chainlink oracle at some point, amongst other solutions, for some specific usecase, but honestly this really is a cope

[Anonymous No.56666818]

>>56666704
layerzero works by using chainlink, it literally can't work without it.

[Anonymous No.56666821]

>>56666801
>Yes ok maybe layerzero will use some chainlink oracle at some point, amongst other solutions, for some specific usecase
Moving goalposts, the post. Quite pathetic.

[Anonymous No.56666827]

>>56666801
projects using chainlink is bearish now..? we are living in unbelievable times.

[Anonymous No.56666837]

>>56666759
>being in a poc means they won

Chainlink has zero wins with CCIP. SWIFT is what you're going to say first, and I'd counter with good luck waiting to see in the 2030's if it translates to mainnet. In the meantime, aave governance and moving snx tokens cross chain, wow what wins Sergey nabbed

[Anonymous No.56666843]

>>56666801
>layerzero says their protocol only works by utilizing chainlink

[Anonymous No.56666862]

>>56666801
What you're missing is that regardless of whether JPM uses LayerZero or CCIP they will be using the Chainlink network in both circumstances because LayerZero's omnichain solution relies on Chainlink oracles to function.

[Anonymous No.56666878]

>>56666837
Wrong!

https://youtu.be/Zp7pHetQYvc?t=879
>we're in multiple conversations with large banks and asset managers that are in discussions with us about production, so not POC not pilots but production real value transactional usage of the system on a consistent growing basis for significant asset classes

[Anonymous No.56666899]

>>56666878
don't bother he's clearly a self-fudder who just wants to bait replies. if this thread stays alive long enough he'll probably have 30+ pbtid.

[Anonymous No.56666921]

>>56666862
Could be any oracle retard. Stop trying to say jpm choosing layerzero instead of link is bullish you sound pathetic

[Anonymous No.56666934]

>>56666899
Shreked

>>56666921
Cope

[Anonymous No.56666946]

>>56666921
>could be any oracle
>layerzero: we ONLY use chainlink oracles

kek, maximum copium

[Anonymous No.56667022]

>>56666921
>Could be any oracle
>Could be any oracle
>Could be any oracle
>you sound pathetic

[Anonymous No.56667083]

How do I buy Onyx coin sirs?

[Anonymous No.56667977]

>>56666497
Sergey is not Jewish FUCK YOU and Blackrock probably has 1000 VPs you imbecile

[Anonymous No.56667991]

>>56666651
fudcucks in absolute shambles over this
they should kill themselves immediately

[Anonymous No.56668390]

>>56666651
Imagine helping your CCIP competitor. If sergay had balls he would disable oracles for layer zero until everyone uses CCIP. But he's a weak pussy

[Anonymous No.56668398]

>>56666714
So what. Traffic generated by JP Morgan should be entirely on Link, not scammer zero

[Anonymous No.56668411]

>>56666258
chudlink is there too
https://twitter.com/CryptoSeq/status/1724729820355952786

[Anonymous No.56668425]

>>56666946
>>56667991
>After more than a year of combined effort we’re incredibly excited for the Google Cloud oracle to roll out on LayerZero. The Google Cloud oracle is a purpose built verifier that is available today to all LayerZero applications and will be configured as the default as of Sep 19th.

>the default

[Anonymous No.56668433]

>>56668425
There is no such thing as "Google Cloud oracle"

[Anonymous No.56668448]

>>56668398
I agree, now I’m angry. FAT FAT FAT FAT FAT!

[Anonymous No.56668453]

>>56668448
Wooooooooo he's faaaaaaaat!!! what a big fat fatty ass stupid bitch. WHat dumb ass fat ass bitch I would beat that nigga up so bad.

[Anonymous No.56668465]

>>56668433
https://layerzero.gitbook.io/docs/ecosystem/oracle/google-cloud-oracle

[Anonymous No.56668519]

Is this another VC’s hyped Chainlink killer. Kek. You’ll see lots of these and you know how it ends

[Anonymous No.56668521]

>>56668465
>layerzero.gitbook.io
Great source bro

[Anonymous No.56668528]

>>56666258
Lol xrp chads tried to warn you guise

[Anonymous No.56668534]

>>56668521
Yes the official layerzero is a pretty solid source. Where is your source that the google cloud oracle, which layerzero are using BY DEFAULT, doesn’t exist?

>verification not required

[Anonymous No.56668558]

>>56668425
>Google Cloud oracle

[Anonymous No.56668561]

>>56668534
How website completely unrelated to Google proves that Google is running their own oracle? Are you retarded?
>Where is your source that the google cloud oracle, which layerzero are using BY DEFAULT, doesn’t exist?
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Proving-Non-Existence

[Anonymous No.56668562]

>>56666286
Knight gay...nightger ..nigger
Bee blue..beluu..below
Nigger below?

[Anonymous No.56668628]

>>56668561
You should probably contact LayerZero and tell them that their DEFAULT oracle solution doesn’t exist. LayerZero seem to be unaware of this fact.

Aren’t linkers all about truth>trust?

[Anonymous No.56668667]

>>56666258
First paige hill has sex with my father and now THIS!?!?

[Anonymous No.56668685]

>>56668628
You should contact Google and tell them that they have new product. Google seem to be unaware of this fact.

[Anonymous No.56668779]

>>56666946
Well no it seems that their default oracle is something else, see >>56668465. Why do advocates always lie like that it just makes things worse

[Anonymous No.56668792]

>>56668685
Previously reported at Blockworks, Google Cloud will act as an oracle provider for LayerZero, a permissionless protocol for relaying messages between blockchains. While Google Cloud serves as an additional option, users can still opt for other Web3 interoperability protocols like Chainlink if they prefer.

users can still opt for other Web3 interoperability protocols like Chainlink if they prefer.

>the LINKer scratches their head, increasingly nervously.

[Anonymous No.56668810]

>>56666651
lol

[Anonymous No.56668823]

>>56668792
>>56668558
>Google Cloud

LMAOOOOOOO BTFOOOODD

[Anonymous No.56668833]

>>56668792
Literally the only technical oracle details you can find for Google Cloud is Chainlink.

[Anonymous No.56668855]

>>56668833
>1996
>I can’t find any public information about Google Search
>it therefore doesn’t exist and Google are not working on it.

[Anonymous No.56668881]

>>56668855
If a major user were talking about how they're using Google Search in 1996, you bet your ass I'd expect to find concrete evidence on it.

It's always possible that this is in fact a fully proprietary Google Cloud oracle, but the lack of evidence suggests it's more likely that something is getting skewed in the media reporting.

[Anonymous No.56668889]

>>56666651
>Our protocol is designed in a way that does not preclude the use of arbitrary relayer services, which ensures that there is no collusion between the Relayer and Oracle

oh cool

I'm going to design a car that flies and captures carbon and doesn't need a token

[Anonymous No.56668917]

>>56668792
>posts irrelevant "source"
>then posts even more irrelevant "source"
I accept your concession

[Anonymous No.56668954]

>>56668792
>While Google Cloud serves as an additional option
>additional option
>default
???

[Anonymous No.56668961]

kek fuddies

[Anonymous No.56668976]

>>56666388
LayerZero unironically came out with CCIP about a year before link did.
They're also backed by the biggest VCs in the world so take that as you will...

[Anonymous No.56668987]

>>56666818
Not really true that it can't work without it since they did exactly that for a while with their own oracles.
They did decide to start using chainlink oracles at some point though so obv they see some value in doing that.
But it's not really accurate to say that it can't work without link desu

[Anonymous No.56668992]

>>56668954
https://medium.com/layerzero-official/layerzero-x-google-cloud-7b4784873071

The Google Cloud oracle is a purpose built verifier that is available today to all LayerZero applications and will be configured as the default as of Sep 19th.

Don’t you dare ??? me ever again.

[Anonymous No.56669004]

>>56668992
>The Google Cloud oracle is a purpose built verifier that is available today
Source?
Verification on chain?

[Anonymous No.56669032]

>>56669004
Source: LayerZero Official.

[Anonymous No.56669042]

>>56669032
So where can we see it?
Layerzero says it's available "today" (September 12)

[Anonymous No.56669052]

>>56669042
https://layerzero.gitbook.io/docs/ecosystem/oracle/google-cloud-oracle

Its in the official LayerZero documentation. You’re welcome.

[Anonymous No.56669131]

>another episode of stinky linky performing all kinds of mental gymnastics to preserve his head canon fantasy of linky world domination
the absolute state

[Anonymous No.56669168]

>>56669052
The contract code is Layerzero, and the contract creator is a Layerzero wallet.

What you posted is literally the contract addresses you should use to in order to "use Google Cloud with Layerzero".
Not the Google Cloud oracle.

[Anonymous No.56669186]

>>56669052
https://blockworks.co/news/layerzero-google-cloud-oracle-operator-messaging
Interesting

>Unlike running a single validator in Solana or Ethereum and not having the ability to stop attacks, Google Cloud will have the ability to veto the attack, Zarick explained.

>“Cross-chain messaging always boils down to some level of trust, so there is no way that you can achieve trustless cross-chain messaging,” he said.

>Node operators on LayerZero can introduce latency measures, but ultimately because applications have the choice to choose other oracle providers, messages themselves can never completely be censored.

>“The way LayerZero is built is that every message is sequentially nonce order enforced, what that means is that if you sent a message first and I sent one, mine can’t get delivered until yours gets there,” Zarick said. “That’s enforced by code, so transactions can’t be taken out unless they turn off the entire messaging link.”

[Anonymous No.56669189]

>>56669131
https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/mas-media-library/development/fintech/guardian/interlinking-networks-technical-paper-vfinal.pdf

MAS = Project Guardian

[Anonymous No.56669196]

>>56669186
I opened all the doors and windows in my room, unless this bitcoin miner heats up the whole planet (which would be epic) I don't think it's gunna crash, and even then, I'd fix it.

[Anonymous No.56669292]

How the fuck do I obtain SDL

[Anonymous No.56669309]

>>56669052
>>56669168
In fact, there's literally NOTHING in the contracts that even vaguely refers to anything Google Cloud-related.
All there is is a bunch of Layerzero code.
Pic related had it right from the start: this setup doesn't make any sense from a technical point of view.

Here's my personal theory, which may shock and appal you: Layerzero is literally just running their own verifier, and using Google Cloud as their server. No different from how you store your pics on iCloud.
And they named this Google Cloud server an "oracle" just to add a whiff of legitimacy among the crypto crowd.
That's pretty much the only option based on the evidence we have.

[Anonymous No.56669343]

>>56669168
>>56669189
>No mention of google oracle, only mentions chanlink labs in the appendix.

I kneel.

[Anonymous No.56669451]

>>56669343
you know what, based

[Anonymous No.56669581]

>>56669309
>Here's my personal theory, which may shock and appal you: Layerzero is literally just running their own verifier, and using Google Cloud as their server. No different from how you store your pics on iCloud.
How does that in with >>56669186? LayerZero can literally just go up to Google Cloud and say: hey pull that transaction?

[Anonymous No.56669595]

>>56669581
How does that tie in with*

[Anonymous No.56669634]

>>56669581
>LayerZero can literally just go up to Google Cloud and say: hey pull that transaction?
If my theory is correct, then they wouldn't have to ask Google Cloud at all, any more than you would have to "ask Apple" to remove a pic from your icloud.
THEY would be the ones running their own cloud server on Google Cloud. Layerzero themselves would be able to pull any transactions that go through the verifier.

And honestly, the contract code for the verifier that connects to the "google cloud oracle" is all Layerzero code, so I really don't see how my theory could be incorrect (although info is pretty sparse).

[Anonymous No.56669689]

>>56669634
Sounds plausible. Especially considering:
>>“Cross-chain messaging always boils down to some level of trust, so there is no way that you can achieve trustless cross-chain messaging,” he said.
He is pretty much saying *someone* has to have the ability to do rollbacks (while heavily inferring that Google Cloud will be the judge of that), and that there is no way to do it without a backdoor like that. I can see it actually being LayerZero themselves who have this privilege/responsibility.

[Anonymous No.56669699]

>mug google cloud oracle
what kind of fud level retardation did we reach in today's age
fuddies are brain dead and their arguments make no sense
literally zero evidence for a google oracle

also why the work and connection with Eric Schmidt as a former CEO ?

think about that for a second

[Anonymous No.56669724]

>>56669689
>while heavily inferring that Google Cloud will be the judge of that
If you read the article from the perspective that my theory is correct, it really is hilarious how they're being ever so vaguely misleading in their wording.

I mean this phrase for instance: "“There’s no way an attack can happen without [Google Cloud] being compromised as well,” Zarick said." just makes perfect sense.
Yes you would need to hack Google Cloud to attack the verifier, but not because the verifier is being operated BY Google Cloud.

Just like you would need to hack icloud to get someone's pics, but not because the pics are being made and saved BY Apple.

[Anonymous No.56670327]

the chart

[Anonymous No.56670711]

>>56669699
>also why the work and connection with Eric Schmidt as a former CEO ?
maybe it was just to keep his enemies closer

[Anonymous No.56670791]

>>56666651
It gets better
>https://www.apollo.io/companies/Chainlink-Labs

[Anonymous No.56670864]

>>56668558
the google cloud oracle is literally chainlink infra. it's like none of you were here for the run up to $5, which revolved around the google cloud partnership - as well as ignoring that the former CEO of google is an advisor to chainlink. this is brain dead, poop eating tier discourse and most of you are going to die on the side of the road

[Anonymous No.56670912]

>>56670791
>https://www.apollo.io/companies/Chainlink-Labs
>Uh oh, Page Not Found

[Anonymous No.56670923]

>>56666258
Remember when we used to think Liink was Chainlink?

We've been taking so many Ls it's crazy

[Anonymous No.56671166]

>>56666258
Kek let's see how layerzero handles all of the offchain computation. Oh wait...it cant. Faggot fudders dont even understand the most valuable aspect of ccip.

[Anonymous No.56672511]

>>56666521
Kek

>>56666407
Based

[Anonymous No.56672542]

>>56666258
>We lost
>Nothing of value has akshually lost.

[Anonymous No.56672660]

Can you invest in Onyx? Buy JP Morgan stock?