CCIP is fucked

[Anonymous No.58360005]

someone transfered $1 million USDC via CCIP and only paid $0.01 in fees, lmao

werent linkies saying ccip would capture a percentage fee instead of a flat fee???

maybe if banks start transferring quadrillion over CCIP in 2050 then chainlink might start to turn a profit with roughly $10 in fees, lmao

[Anonymous No.58360093]

>>58360005
Bullish. Everyone will use CCIP and there will be millions of tx a day.

[Anonymous No.58360114]

>>58360005
Thats .01 Link in fees brainlet. Now extrapolate that to millions of txns.

[Anonymous No.58360143]

>>58360005
loooool
fees are too low stinkies
givin it all away for free like a slut xD

[Anonymous No.58360157]

This is incredible. So close.

[Anonymous No.58360203]

the cuckolds of crypto

wtf is wrong with this team, they're on drugs???
https://files.catbox.moe/x035jt.webm
https://files.catbox.moe/x035jt.webm
https://files.catbox.moe/x035jt.webm

[Anonymous No.58360277]

>>58360005
CCIP was only providing abstraction/messaging in this instance.

[Anonymous No.58360439]

Sergey believes in oracles as a public good.
He likes comparing it to TCP / IP protocol that the internet is built on.
You VILL subsidize for the greater good.
You VILL be a good socialist comrade and donate your wealth for the common good.
2030 is going to be beautiful. Our beloved klaus schwab will turn the planet into a utopia.
You will get everything provided for free in the new economy away from evil racist capitalism.

[Anonymous No.58360456]

>>58360005
looks like they paid $555 actually

[Anonymous No.58362028]

>>58360005
bullish if we take the trillions per day on account

[Anonymous No.58362188]

>>58360005
Only need $100T daily volume to generate some semblance of demand for the token.. BOOLISHH

[Anonymous No.58363237]

>>58360005
>scaling your business is now fud
I wonder what’s the next fudrucker cope is.

[Anonymous No.58363271]

I remember when stinkers thought arbitrum was gonna use chainlink nodes kek. They thought they were gonna be rich. Exactly as with CCiP

[Anonymous No.58363303]

>>58360114
network will be clogged if thats the case

[Anonymous No.58363340]

>>58360005
Post the hash, you can't go back that far in the Arbitrum and Base explorers.

[Anonymous No.58363451]

>>58363340
It was $1500 in fees.
https://arbiscan.io/tx/0x1d0fc5945a58d6536d00160a02b24eb6b0e0a68ae6104e085c8b3d3b41f0d683

[Anonymous No.58363567]

>>58363451
> $1500 in fees
None of which, was converted to Link, or paid to Chainlink team/stakers.

ZERO REVENUE ON A MILLION DOLLARS TRANSACTION

[Anonymous No.58363582]

>>58360005
How disgustingly new are you?
Sending 1,000 BTC/ETH/… costs exactly the same in transaction fees as sending 0.0001 BTC/ETH/…
This has always been the case, and is one of the reasons oracles are so useful: to bundle transactions off-chain.

[Anonymous No.58363682]

>>58363451
>t was $1500 in fees.
Not seeing it.

>>58363567
The Link nodes were paid directly in Link, it's even in OP's pic you retard.

Also,
Total ETH fees (L1+L2; see pic) were $0.006631398632
Total Link fee was 0.01660482822629538 Link, so roughly $0.30

Seems like Link is more needed than ETH.

[Anonymous No.58363725]

>>58363567
>None of which, was converted to Link
ALL fees were paid in Link, including gas.

[Anonymous No.58363766]

>>58363725
>>58363682
Delusional. The Xswap team confirmed that they don't convert the fees into Link, they have no incentive to.
CLG and all the other faggots say fees get converted to link, but they dont.

>Total Link fee was 0.01660482822629538 Link, so roughly $0.30
chainlink gets .30 cents out of the $1500 transaction fee? thats actually nothing. 1 trillion in transacted value gives Xswap $150 million in fees, and Link $30,000

[Anonymous No.58363778]

>>58363766
>The Xswap team confirmed that they don't convert the fees into Link, they have no incentive to
You got this ass backwards.
The fees are paid in Link and converted to destination chain gas.

>$1500 transaction fee
Source?

[Anonymous No.58363784]

>>58360114
25c per $1m now divide that amongst all the stakers.

You would need over $1 quadrillion just to make $3 from genuine staking rewards. Link holders truly are the biggest cucks

[Anonymous No.58363795]

>>58363784
>25c per $1m
*per transaction.

Imagine not knowing how blockchain transaction fees work lmao
Protip: you pay per transaction, regardless of amount.

[Anonymous No.58363817]

>>58363778

[Anonymous No.58363846]

>>58363817
That's not the CCIP transaction fee you retard, that's just information contained in the CCIP transaction.

By your logic it costs $200 million in transportation costs to haul a security truck full of gold lmao

[Anonymous No.58363854]

>>58360005
>transact from any chain to any chain for cheap
fuuuuck, it is dead on arrival! no one will use it!

[Anonymous No.58363879]

>>58363846
braindead cope. Every Xswap transaction on arb gets its cut to this wallet

https://arbiscan.io/token/0xaf88d065e77c8cc2239327c5edb3a432268e5831?a=0xb37275558f02f05104c2ba35199d16adeb43432f

Link may be needed, but literally only 1 link is needed. 17 whole dollars.

[Anonymous No.58363907]

>>58363817
>not knowing how to read a blockchain explorer
Yikes.

[Anonymous No.58363946]

>>58363879
All of that is merely the payload for the CCIP transaction, you absolute retard.

Here's the bottom line: the total fee paid for this specific CCIP transaction was $30 worth of Link, 1/20th of which went to ETH gas (both L1 and L2)

[Anonymous No.58363957]

>>58363946
>$30
*30 cents

And 1/20th of this went to ETH gas

[Anonymous No.58363978]

>>58363946
Now i see why people fud on here all day. You are so fucking stupid even when given facts you deny it

[Anonymous No.58363991]

>>58363978
By your logic Bitcoin is not needed because you can send $1 billion worth and the transaction fee is the same as when sending $1 worth.

You're clueless, absolutely braindead.

[Anonymous No.58364017]

>>58360114
>Thats .01 Link
CCIP is fucked, it's too expensive.

[Anonymous No.58364040]

>>58363991
nope, im saying you'll get about 150million dollars more in fees than chainlink's 30k in fees per 1 trillion, by investing in whatever protocol is built on CCIP. Link not needed, just ape whatever uses it, you'll make endlessly more profit

>link collects fees on them all
for link to breakeven on the fees from xswap, it needs 5000 projects running CCIP. not happening in our lifetime(im 26)(and i hold more link than you)
Stupid fuck

[Anonymous No.58364074]

god i hate u stinks
i seriously hate u stinks
i truly hate them all
lets make fun until they fall
fuck all linkies
they are stinkies
fuck them all

[Anonymous No.58364138]

>>58364040
By your logic Bitcoin and Ethereum are bad investments because you can send $1 billion worth and the transaction fee is the same as when sending $1 worth.
And let's not forget how you thought no Link tokens were involved in the transaction fees because "nothing was converted to Link", even though the ENTIRE transaction fee was paid in Link tokens to begin with.

You have no idea what you're saying. Seeing you try to figure this out as you go is like watching a toddler try to eat by himself for the first time.

[Anonymous No.58364165]

>>58364040
Youre so fucking stupid it hurts. Its over, you lost. Shut the fuck up now.

[Anonymous No.58364198]

>>58364040
Vkz4HZJ6, this is your father. take the L. I'm very disappointed in you. I raised you better than this

[Anonymous No.58364223]

>>58364138
No link was paid, eth was
no link was converted, xswap got the entire fee
link
got
nothing

yall are in an echochamber

[Anonymous No.58364242]

>>58363784
The feds moved $2B in BTC a few weeks ago. Only paid like $20 in fees. Seems like it's over for BTC.

[Anonymous No.58364266]

>>58363784
>one dollar quadrillion
what did he mean by this

[Anonymous No.58364319]

>>58364223
>no link was converted, xswap got the entire fee
The fee xswap got has literally NOTHING to do with the CCIP transaction, it's merely part of the information sent via CCIP.
You are too dumb to be real, holy shit.

[Anonymous No.58364355]

CCIP fees already plummeting in April

https://x.com/jackcekovic/status/1778385823433396632?s=46&t=pxB_5KMjs0qNm4ER3GIweA

The grift continues being exposed

[Anonymous No.58364363]

>>58364319
Now you admit Xswap got the $1500 fee. The fees Xswap gets forever outweighs the fees CCIP "gets" until 5000 projects are running ccip transactions. 20+ years away.
not 2 weeks

[Anonymous No.58364418]

>>58364363
>the $1500 fee
"The" $1500 fee?

[Anonymous No.58364466]

>>58364355
Want even more pain? These "fees" arent even to Chainlink. They're to the CCIP users(xswap, chainswap), and they're paid in Eth not LINK.

[Anonymous No.58364472]

>>58363303
Which network? Ethereum? Base? Arbitrum? Polygon? The private chain for Bank A? Or the private chain for Bank B? Or whichever of the other hundreds of private bank chains out there?

[Anonymous No.58364518]

>>58364466
>These "fees" arent even to Chainlink. They're to the CCIP users(xswap, chainswap)
Anon, the CCIP users are the ones paying the fees.

[Anonymous No.58364551]

>>58364355
Imagine even thinking the shitty dashboard is correct. It's not. It's full of bugs and has 0 guarantees of being anywhere near correct.

[Anonymous No.58364558]

>>58363784
25c times a thousand is 2500 dollars plus the transactions would mean around 187K per user
stop fudding plz

[Anonymous No.58364566]

Why don't CLL release a dashboard? Fucking sick of these back and forths with false arbitrary data.

[Anonymous No.58364627]

>>58364040
>>58363879
>>58363817

Part of CCIP's billing is taking some percentage of the token transferred; 0.07% listed in the link below.


https://docs.chain.link/ccip/billing

The $1500 there is 0.15% of the value transferred. I am curious if there's a different cost for stable coins and this is part of Chainlink's billing process.

[Anonymous No.58364865]

>>58364627
the rate is based on the value of link when the transaction was processed. if paying in another denomination then you'd pay the premium rate which is obvs higher. any non-link payment would be charged at the higher rate.This would include stablecoins
i believe this to be correct but if someone knows better then please do respond.
The premium incentivises sale of the token. Pushing the price up and paying for my Ford Fiesta repayments

[Anonymous No.58364961]

>>58364363
Why the fuck did Chainlink build CCIP just to let dickswap skim most of the fees from using OUR fucking protocol. Chainlink dropped the ball here by not creating their own platform. Fucking idiots all of them

[Anonymous No.58364976]

>>58364865
the premium incentivizes purchases of LINKbin order to pay the NOP. the sale of the non-native token would take place in order to purchase LINK to pay the NOP.

>>58364466
are you a shill playing 4d chess? because your arguments are so retarded, they make me think you're actually trying to get people to buy LINK

[Anonymous No.58364985]

>>58364961
hey, you see all those trees over there? *THAT'S* the forest.

[Anonymous No.58365033]

>>58364976
what's NOP?

[Anonymous No.58365036]

>>58364961
>just to let dickswap skim most of the fees
Dickswap is paying for 100% of the ccip fees, retard.

[Anonymous No.58365102]

>>58365033
Node operator

>>58365036
remember that other thread a few weeks back where a CCIP tx moved something like $10k and charged $700 bucks for it, and fuddies came out of the woodwork to scream how no one will use it because fees were too high? turns out that tx contained a half a dozen moves through half a dozen chains with a ton of data to boot, but the argument was that CCIP was dead on arrival because it was too expensive. now look at this thread. fud has never made me more bullish

[Anonymous No.58365105]

>>58365036
No fucking shit. Because they own the swap protocol you dumb fucking cunt. Chainlink could have built their own without us needing a middleman like dickswap to capture revenue on top of ccip. We could have had it all go directly to chainlink/stakers instead. Dumb fuck

>>58364985
Hey you see all those trees over there? Lets bring in some immigrants to help us cut them down and let them sell the wood. Even though we could do it all ourselves and make more money. THAT's the dickswap.

[Anonymous No.58365165]

>>58365105
>ETH, Solana, Binance, … should’ve invented every defi project, L2, Dex, stablecoin, … themselves instead of letting others skim all those fees!
This is you.

ccip fees are ccip fees, and users like dickswap pay them.

[Anonymous No.58365200]

I am actually getting bullish after reading this thread and I have been fudding link for weeks. Great back and forth happening here reminds me of old days.

[Anonymous No.58365240]

>>58365165
Comparing CCIP to a L1 is a retards take.

Chainlink did all the hard work creating a cross chain protocol FOR YEARS and Dickswap comes along with pre-existing swap protocol code and slaps it on top with a GUI and gets a disproportionate amount of fees for much much less work. You must be a commie freeloading cunt. Now fuck off here and go collect your unemployment gibs.

[Anonymous No.58365273]

wtf is dickswap

[Anonymous No.58365278]

>>58365240
>Chainlink did all the hard work creating a cross chain protocol FOR YEARS
Same with ETH creating a smart contract platform for years.
Only for hundreds of projects to come along and slap copy-pasted protocols on it and get a disproportionate amount of fees for much less work.

[Anonymous No.58365300]

>>58365278
Check this out faggot.
https://app.transporter.io/
This is Chainlinks front end of CCIP.

[PAY ME No.58365306]

>>58365105
Pay me soon or you'll be cut off

[Anonymous No.58365330]

>>58364865
In the billing, there's the messaging costs to cover the gas fees, where chainlink charges a 10% premium if you're using a native gas token. This cost is static.

But then they're taking a cut of the token value transferred. Chainlink wants a cut of the Total Value Enabled (TVE) metric they've been tracking the past few years. They're not going to let you securely move $1M from one chain to another and only charge you the gas fees. The $1500 would line up with Token Amount x Price x Percentage

1M USDC x $2.143 x 0.0007 = $1500

I am assuming the price for transferring stable coins is $2.143 but it's the only thing that makes sense for the billing system to be applied here.

[Anonymous No.58365351]

>>58365240
>Comparing CCIP to a L1 is a retards take.
It's the exact same deal, retard.
Vitalik built Ethereum specifically for applications to be built on top of it.

The exact same is true for CCIP.

[Anonymous No.58365387]

>>58365330
Fuck I'm retarded. they're probably charging double the percentage cost for stable coins whose TOKEN price is pegged to $1.00.

[PAY ME No.58365410]

>>58365330
whatever the fee is. if i can profit from ANY part of it.. count me in. I'm here to make fucking bank and don't care if it's zero point zero or zero point zero zero i'm in and i'm not leaving it's still a fucking huge number.
Anyone missing this boat is such a spastic i swear

[Anonymous No.58365429]

>>58365351
No it's not the same you fucking retard.

Check this out: https://app.transporter.io/

I was priming you to get you ready for this. Some of you really are retarded brains and don't deserve this. Chainlink now has their own front end.

[Anonymous No.58365523]

>>58365429
Fake.
The website logo is Arial, and your screenshot clearly shows Times New Roman.

[Anonymous No.58365539]

>>58365306
Aged horribly

[PAY ME No.58365594]

>>58365523
The language was more of a giveaway. Is this that adem guy? he'll be dead by 40 if he keeps this anger level up

[Anonymous No.58365623]

>>58365594
no more kys spam today from you huh?

[Anonymous No.58365701]

>>58365523
dumb fuck go look on twitter. Its all over there now. You dont need to be scared to click and actually look for yourself, no one wants to steal your 10 link

[Anonymous No.58365750]

>>58365523
Community literally leaked and forced them to announce early. You're fucking welcome

[Anonymous No.58366038]

>>58365750
I believe our work here is done.

[Anonymous No.58366099]

>>58365429
>Check this out: https://app.transporter.io/
nigger stop posting this
USE THE URL FROM THE CHAINLINK ANNOUNCEMENT

[Anonymous No.58366139]

>>58365750
>-1%

[Anonymous No.58366244]

>>58365594
>duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude when my imaginary internet money moons (in 20 years) I will be so dangerous


THE Cuckolds of crypto

[Anonymous No.58366261]

>>58365750
>leak
>duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude itshhhhh LE STHHHHECRETTTT

>-0.5%

[Anonymous No.58366307]

>>58366099
>nigger stop posting this
>USE THE URL FROM THE CHAINLINK ANNOUNCEMENT
Look at the time I posted it. It was before Chainlink broke the news dumbass. I have inside sources

[Anonymous No.58366695]

>>58365306
im consuming price feeds without paying for them

what is chainlink labs going to do about it?

using them

FOR FREE

[Anonymous No.58366753]

>>58360005
And the sybil attacks will ensue when the banks, chortle to themselves about how cheap LINK is and compromise the security model rather than let a few thousand NEETs get rich like the millions of house owners. What a plot.

Stop dilating for a few minutes and think about super linear staking, the security model, and the ensuing supply shock.

[Anonymous No.58366794]

>>58366307
Confession, I didn't touch >>58365300's link because I didn't trust it. Sorry I doubted you anon.

[Anonymous No.58366803]

>>58366695
you put that price information back, faggot
you didn't pay for it

[Anonymous No.58366838]

>>58366038
>>58365750

[PAY ME No.58366881]

>>58365623
>no more kys spam today from you?
sorry, no. "kys" not my style generally. Hope this helps

[Anonymous No.58367375]

>>58363784
>Deranged fudder
>>58365429
>>58366307
>Leaker with inside sources shilling new Chainlink features
Kek. Anyone have that meme of the split personality fudder/shill

[Anonymous No.58369513]

>>58365701
I was joking babe. You take yourself way too seriously

[Anonymous No.58369641]

>>58367375
>Anyone have that meme of the split personality fudder/shill

boy do I

[Anonymous No.58369693]

>>58363271
>arbitrum
dang that brought back memories. kek i even remember how everyone said it was such a good project too because no token and here we are with a token anyway.

[Anonymous No.58370075]

PROGRAMMABLE TOKEN BRIDGE REFERENCE IMPLEMENTATION