Chainlink doesn't really "do" anything, does it?

[Anonymous No.57391442]

"Paxos uses its Chainlink PoR feeds as a way to earn credibility with distrustful DeFi traders, but its “fully-backed” claims don’t become more credible just because they pass through Chainlink’s decentralized oracle network.

Using an extreme analogy – a stablecoin issuer “self-attesting” to its reserves via Chainlink would be like FTX emailing its financials to 16 people and asking them to disseminate the numbers on its behalf. Even if numbers are “audited” (as they often were, in the case of FTX), they would ultimately only be as trustworthy as that original email from FTX."

[Anonymous No.57391485]

>>57391442
yes, there are several chainlink applications where the data provider is the sole source and provider of that data and the routing through chainlink is therefore pointless, since the heartbeat reporting from chainlink is equivalent to that provider simply uploading the data on-chain themselves. this is I hope temporary and will eventually be replaced with a trust-minimized method of attestation

[Anonymous No.57391491]

>>57391442
Hardly any of these cryptos do anything. If you read about them they all say vague shit like "oh it makes stuff on the block chain easier and better" but doesn't say how.

[Anonymous No.57391496]

>>57391442
Don't expect replies. Pic related

[Anonymous No.57391508]

>>57391485
>trust-minimized method of attestation
like what?

[Anonymous No.57391535]

>>57391508
I don't know, and I don't think chainlink does either. At least the other big services - CCIP, VRF, Automation, and Price Feeds/Data Streams - don't have this problem. But PoR is in a very early stage

[Anonymous No.57391564]

>>57391535
anon im not sure a random number generator justifies a price of over $0.50 per chainlink token. all the other stuff im pretty sure other blockchains do anyways

[Anonymous No.57391578]

Yes and this is why chainlink is $14. It was used for terraluna and look how that turned out. Remember Lady Luck? Or Moab token? Bancor? Chainlink is as trustworthy as asking sergey to watch your lunch for you

[Anonymous No.57391604]

>>57391564
to be quite frank with you, I'm not sure where any of these services require large quantities of the Chainlink token. perhaps CCIP, but its widespread integration into established DeFi and banking architecture does not yet exist, and it will be awhile before it does. it seems possible that the security guarantees of staking - which is intended to replace what is currently an entirely trust-based model- will direct fees to stakers, which in turn would buoy its value due to yield. But this is just speculation

[Anonymous No.57391646]

>>57391604
>>57391578
>>57391564
>>57391535
Holy shit this board really gone down hill without the OGs discussing anything. Look through the archives you stupid newfag retards.

[Anonymous No.57391663]

>>57391442
True. There is a huge cognitive issue with chainlink bagholders: most of them actually believe that chainlink can verify the truth of any given information. This course false, not only does chainlink do virtually nothing it has no way of verifying anything, just that junk was passed from this place to that

[Anonymous No.57391677]

>>57391485
lol. Even… wait for it. Lmao

[Anonymous No.57391731]

>>57391442
Chainlink (peace be upon him) will litchrally make all off chain data on chain bro 2 more weeks.

[Anonymous No.57391797]

>>57391646
They all know they’re just bored and want someone to refute them so they know they aren’t alone.

[Anonymous No.57391834]

soon chainlinkers will be so poor they will know the pain of not knowing where their next meal will come from :^)

[Anonymous No.57391972]

>>57391442
only Proof we have here is PoB, proof of betrayal