Can someone refute this LINK FUD?

File: 104 KB, 1332x515, Screenshot 2018-03-15 at 6.07.02 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Can someone refute this LINK FUD? Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:07:21 2018 No.8366902 [Reply] [Original]

or is he right?

https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/84n80w/blockchain_oracles_will_make_smart_contracts_fly/

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:09:12 2018 No.8366936 The problem can be fixed by simply making a new Eth blockchain? And you consider this actual FUD?

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:11:08 2018 No.8366980

Yes, of course I can, because I am an autistic genius who understands computer jibber jabber. I won't give you an actual answer, however, because I'm just such a smug nerd that I'd rather simply assert my mental superiority and make you feel inferior and then move along. Ha! Ha! Small brain much, idiot?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:12:59 2018 No.8367025 he's just a stupid eth fanboy, and not a very rich one at that

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:13:04 2018 No.8367028

>>8366902
He is absolutely right, the oracle "problem" hasn't been solved because there isn't an actual need for it at the moment (extremely few real world case use with no need for cross operation)

If a real need would arise it could probably be solved by any competent team in a few days

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:15:40 2018 No.8367089 ETH is more than enough to perform Chainlink tasks. The Link token is useless.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:17:09 2018 No.8367125 >>8366980 kek

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:17:10 2018 No.8367126 >>8366902 omg op please don't say you fell for the link meme? we are here just having fun memeing with the bros, laughing at sergij and there are newfags who actually buy this garbage?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:19:07 2018 No.8367164 Haha god I love linkies >Muh it will solve the oracle problem https://www.quant.network/

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:19:17 2018 No.8367168 lol. sounds like a smart comment for anyone who has no idea how link works.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:20:07 2018 No.8367182 Link is a meme. Shills claim decentralising the oracle process will make smart contracts trustless, but they'll never address the fact that the API process remains centralised thus rendering the whole operation superfluous.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:22:37 2018 No.8367223 lol, chainlink feel sorry for u niggers

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 18:41:08 2018 No.8367570 >>8366902 Because shit like this doesn't happen with a decentralized oracle service: >https://twitter.com/oraclizeit/status/966845312861077504 What an ass clown.

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:09:37 2018 No.8368049
File: 417 KB, 744x836, 0C0C8918D09045089AB2683FD3D0714C.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Linkies are seriously fucking retarded. If you really think this tech is "revolutionary" then why the fuck is it still dropping? Fuckin delusional. The entire market is imploding including ChainLink.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:20:47 2018 No.8368227 >>8366902 >listen guise lets just make a new blockchain and and hear me out, LETS PUT ORACLES IN IT LINK and ETH BTFO

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:22:09 2018 No.8368246
File: 21 KB, 163x186, 4554456778.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8366902

>Another one of the 40 threads+ a day with this exact same fud.

Yes retard. Decentralized censorship-resistance tech doesn't need decentralized-censorship resistant ways of obtaining reliable data onto smart contracts and dapps. Now sell your link and buy deep brain chain

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:31:15 2018 No.8368401 >>8367028 No need for it? Have you ever developed anything?

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:32:35 2018 No.8368421 [DELETED]

isnt the whole blockchain just a majority vote of some sort?
if a new block is mined they compare the transactions made and the majority will be considered true

for the ssl part the transaction via chainlink will be encrypted as well just read the whitepaper if you want to now more how this will be done

for the but then the apis need to be decentralized as well
there are multiple sources for certain data and sergey said that sources are mostly considerd secure already

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:33:43 2018 No.8368440 >>8368421 Can you unironically delete this?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:52:39 2018 No.8368721 >>8368421 Please unironically delete this

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:54:06 2018 No.8368756 SXSW talk is out! Fuck this FUD, The solution is LINK, as far as DOCUSIGN IS CONCERNED https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=D95jXGCXkqc [Embed]

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:56:30 2018 No.8368806

>>8367182
You still have the advantage of adding external data to your trustless contract, which can't be added to ethereum. The ethereum blockchain, like all blockchains, was meant to be deterministic. There is no way it can include external data that may change over time without ruining the key design concept behind it.

So all blockchains require oracles to get off-chain data. Now you can have a centralized oracle that will be subject to downtime and constitute a central point of failure or you can have chainlink.

The API remains centralized, but that does not mean the whole operation is superfluous. If you want the benefits of using automated, trustless smart contracts (and there are many benefits to it), you have no other options but to rely on oracles (centralized or decentralized).

Furthermore that the API is a central point of failure can be bypassed. Either by adding a temporal clause in your contract (check API result at time t1, t2, ..., tn over n days for instance) with the assumption that no data source remains compromised or unavailable for long nowadays. Or by making the data provider legally liable in case false data is provided.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 19:57:41 2018 No.8368824 >>8368721 >>8368440 The fuck was that ?

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:03:37 2018 No.8368933

Yes, Ethereum is in the process of implementing decentralised oracles, but it goes deeper than that. Bitcoin is now integrating smart contracts, and will pull all of Ethereum into it. But it goes even deeper. USD is integrating Bitcoin, so will automatically integrate Ethereum and oracles. Oh you think it ends there? Gold ingots are integrating USD which which give you all the power of Bitcoin, Ethereum, oracles, and USD.

It would take gold ingot developers like 15 minutes to put a decentralised oracle on their platform.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:07:15 2018 No.8369007 >>8368824 yeah wtf

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:07:58 2018 No.8369020 >>8368824 >>8369007 cheese pizza

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:08:40 2018 No.8369036

>>8366902
LINK will be useless because ETH will have oracles is similar to saying somethingcoin is useless because Bitcoin could just make a fork. Without that the point about SSL notaries can't move forward. It's correct that the oracle problem is not solvable and that's acknowledged in the whitepaper.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:15:18 2018 No.8369146 File: 267 KB, 627x450, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8368806 dont actually debunk the fud fag, we want the price to go down ?!? unironically delete this one too.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:19:04 2018 No.8369215 >>8366902 iExec solved the oracle problem and it was just a side project for them, bagholding Linkies BTFO

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:19:43 2018 No.8369228 >>8368824 Something about the r9k guy

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:27:29 2018 No.8369351 >>8369215 Not even a good shill job. I’ll buy some so you can make your commission but do better

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:34:44 2018 No.8369475 >>8369351 Not even shilling. iExec encompasses everything that ChainLink sets out to do and more. People will easily be able to just use iExec service providers as oracles. Why will anyone want to use ChainLink when such a competitor exists?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:36:34 2018 No.8369512 >>8369475 i hold rlc but you're a fucking moron. anyone can build oracles. not LINK oracles though.

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:38:29 2018 No.8369536

isnt the whole blockchain just a majority vote of some sort?
if a new block is mined they compare the transactions made and the majority will be considered true

for the ssl part the transaction via chainlink will be encrypted as well just read the whitepaper if you want to now more how this will be done

for the but then the apis need to be decentralized as well
there are multiple sources for certain data and sergey said that sources are mostly considerd secure already

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:41:21 2018 No.8369579

>>8369512
There's nothing special about LINK oracles that won't be encompassed by iExec service nodes. An oracle is just a server that fetches data from an API and hands it to a smart contract. This is something that's easily covered by what iExec provides. ChainLink has no niche if this is the case

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:43:22 2018 No.8369609 Reddit is full of eth cucks that believe tokens are useless and just a way to steal your eth

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:44:23 2018 No.8369621 >>8369579 Link is partnered with swift tho

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:46:17 2018 No.8369649 >>8368824 >>8369007 potently bullish facts

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:46:36 2018 No.8369656

>>8369579
no one is going to stake $1 million smart contracts on any "just plain old oracle".

They want a guarantee of their money back if the data is wrong.
They want security to know they can trust that the data is correct.
RLC doesn't offer either of those solutions. LINK is the only oracle provider that does.

There's several dozen projects that can provide oracles. Only LINK does it in a trustless manner

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 20:56:29 2018 No.8369828

isn't this fud old anyway? basically "decentralized oracles can simply be built on top of ethereum", "anyone can make oracles", "muh decentralization is not important", "muh competitors", etc etc. this shit is getting stale. i guess not everyone is an autistic nolife neet that reads link posts everyday, huh

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:11:44 2018 No.8370102 >>8369656 Also heard Boring say in the talk that every smart contract will need to be audited. That's what QSP does.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:12:27 2018 No.8370116 File: 98 KB, 422x768, ayy_lels.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8368933

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:14:58 2018 No.8370159 >>8369475 You got your commission now shoo

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:15:34 2018 No.8370169 File: 201 KB, 1194x642, Screenshot 2018-03-15 at 9.15.08 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] johnny is taking a swing at him

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:18:46 2018 No.8370217 >>8370169 Checkmate

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:22:24 2018 No.8370266 >>8370169 that cuck got BTFO

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:22:37 2018 No.8370268 >>8370169 Rekt. My linky stays super stinky

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:32:22 2018 No.8370410 >>8370169 fucking reddit, both these fags are probably just making shit up as they go

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:37:47 2018 No.8370493 >>8370169 he isn't taking a swing so much as he is reading off a piece of paper Sergey gave him.

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:41:12 2018 No.8370539

The general rule that has yet to fail me:
When a crypto has a few daily /biz/ threads maximum, each with a couple dozen replies and a fair amount of FUD...stay away
When a crypto has dozens of daily /biz/ threads, and three or four of those daily threads have hundreds of replies and a shit ton of FUD...BUY IMMEDIATELY

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:48:42 2018 No.8370646 >>8370539 not a bad set up

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:50:14 2018 No.8370665 >>8370169 ..and getting BTFO'd worthless shitcoin

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:54:25 2018 No.8370745 File: 49 KB, 660x410, jim.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8370169 > hard on But really though... No one thinks about the external adapters.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 21:57:06 2018 No.8370797 File: 123 KB, 1700x348, 1509272665637.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8368824 >>8369007 >>8369020 >>8369228 >>8369649 Anti-FUD. Niggers be 'ccumulatin

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 22:01:12 2018 No.8370861 >>8370797 kek.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 22:07:53 2018 No.8370976 LOL Looks like ol' Jonny lost the debate Worthless Shitcoin

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 22:36:24 2018 No.8371412 >TFW you spent $4300 on 1000 LINKs and it'll probably be worthless Fuck this shit I should have went with stocks. I'm going full index funds from now on

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 22:40:24 2018 No.8371479 >>8371412 >Not doing this in the first place Wew lad

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 22:45:43 2018 No.8371565 >>8371412 Wow. I got 1000 LINK for $500 How does that make you feel?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 22:47:01 2018 No.8371594 >>8371565 Sorry I left out a 0, I paid ~$4300 for 10,000 LINKs

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 22:48:21 2018 No.8371611 >>8366902 SSL notary = centralized, trustful Link / Blockchain = decentralized, trustless

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 22:49:04 2018 No.8371621 >>8371565 Makes you feel pretty dumb trying to flaunt lol

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 22:50:30 2018 No.8371644 >>8366902 I considered myself pretty informed on LINK. After reading his comment and acknowledging, I have no idea what those words even mean or if they're even actual words. I'm gonna have to do a deep dive.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 23:04:23 2018 No.8371826 >>8370797 True.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 23:06:03 2018 No.8371843 >>8370665 True.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 23:07:59 2018 No.8371871 >>8371611 you dumb fuck, Chainlink going to use a certification service, that by definition is giving trust to certain nodes.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 23:21:30 2018 No.8372072 >>8371871 Huh? You mean reputation?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 23:27:15 2018 No.8372155 >>8372072 >another linkie that hasnt read the whitepaper holy fucking shit you guys are dumb.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 23:28:26 2018 No.8372172 >>8372155 So wait you weren’t talking about the reputation system?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 23:34:37 2018 No.8372247 ITT: not a single refutation Will stinky linkies ever learn?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 15 23:38:49 2018 No.8372310 >>8366902 Good point. Must be why sergey isn't spending any of the 32m ico cash on building a team. He's just sitting on that cash for when he exits.

Anonymous Thu Mar 15 23:43:32 2018 No.8372381
File: 284 KB, 1257x903, stinkyfuckinglinkiesbtfo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Holy shit.. Linkies are getting BTFO right now...

I guess it makes sense, it was always a meme and a shitcoin. All it takes is one step outside of the echo chamber to see just how worthless it actually is. And you guys thought it would ever actually reach $1000... Goddamn that's just sad.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:06:44 2018 No.8372683 >>8372381 Just sold 100k. Sad.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:10:23 2018 No.8372733 if link really was the golden ticket and muh whales were accumulating they'd be done by now and it would've mooned. smart money knows chainlink is a bad investment >but muh top wallets EVERY coin has top wallets

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:13:12 2018 No.8372769 >>8368933 top kek

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:14:03 2018 No.8372776 It's always been a bit odd that after all this time only /biz/ shits all over their dicks for LINK

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:14:56 2018 No.8372785 It's amazing how quickly the post turned post SXSW, you would think that someone was paying people to spam threads on this board and other sites where people discuss altcoins. The SEC should look into this place.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:20:27 2018 No.8372854
File: 463 KB, 1070x601, 1432847736231.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>If by a 'single oracle' you mean asking a random guy on the internet, sure. If you mean an actual company with a contractual obligation to only notarize real data, absolutely not, because I can sue them for breach of contract and demand compensation.

>Anyway, if smart contracts take off, oracle services are going to be obsolete because primary data sources will start signing results. Probably demanding a small payment for it. No need for middlemen.

>Imagine if you're providing an api for some data in demand. You notice that several oracle nodes call it every second and resell it. What do you do? Start signing results with your private key and demand a small payment for every call. I bet there are going to be data markets for that.

>Even ignoring trust issues, there's no reason for chainlink to exist in this scenario.

OH MY GOD HE'S RIGHT

I CAN'T BELIEVE I BOUGHT LINK, YOU GUYS TRICKED ME!

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:23:15 2018 No.8372899 >>8372854 It's surprising Reddit is sometimes visited by intelligent people. This is canonical BTFO.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:29:17 2018 No.8372985 Same guy also wrecked eos, interesting https://www.reddit.com/r/eos/comments/84nyo3/comment/dvreu3x

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:35:08 2018 No.8373070 >>8372854 source?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:35:21 2018 No.8373073 >>8372985 Very valid arguments from an old-school point of view. Actually made me think.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:38:33 2018 No.8373128 >>8367182 >>8367126 It's comforting seeing these copy and pasted.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:39:26 2018 No.8373144 chainlink is going straight to zero.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:43:13 2018 No.8373191 File: 609 KB, 640x621, 1512285452104.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8372854

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:46:40 2018 No.8373238 >>8372854 are we panic selling now?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:47:26 2018 No.8373250
File: 2.68 MB, 480x270, itsover.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8372854
...Jesus Christ.
This is actually a solid argument.
Welp....that's it. LINK is kill. I'm selling to break even as soon as the price goes back up
Last time I ever fall for a /biz/ meme crypto

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 00:55:24 2018 No.8373357 >>8372854 Just sold all my LINK

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:01:47 2018 No.8373435 >>8366902 Fuck off back to rebit, cuck LINK $1000 EOY NOTHING CAN STOP THE LINK MARINES

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:04:15 2018 No.8373461

Found more info

>If the data coming from a single source is corrupted, or a straight up lie, then no oracle system in the world can help you.

What ChainLink Nodes will do, is collect data across all available sources of your weather data, then analyse that data for accuracy, and then send you what it conceives as being accurate.

Ultimately, high quality data in will equal high quality data out.

Premium data services will be desired, but their premium data can also be checked against data provided from free projects, Hobbyists, etc... for accuracy.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LINKTrader/comments/74axxd/how_will_chainlink_really_work_in_practice/

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:05:49 2018 No.8373480

I've been doing a lot of reading on ChainLink and it sounds like a really fascinating project. It definitely aims to tackle some of the biggest issues with smart contracts. I have some concerns, however, and I'm hoping someone can ease them. Sorry for being a Devil's Advocate.

I have a specific use case in mind: A fantasy sports contract. You buy-in, pick players, compete against a pool of people, and the winner gets a payout. The data here would have to be entered by someone watching the game. For example, if it's fantasy football (American Football), someone would have to watch every play, every yard gained, every touchdown, etc.

As I understand, ChainLink is simply bringing a number of "data enterers" (or Oracles) together to help ensure that the statistics are correct. There is no 100% guarantee, but ChainLink aims to have a very high probability that the returned statistics are correct?

I'm also having difficulty understanding the value of the LINK token. I understand it's used to pay for usage of the LINK platform. But ChainLink seems to be a middleman - couldn't smart contracts figure out a way to program in the Oracles directly and a consensus mechanism for choosing Oracle data? Furthermore, couldn't another project simply copy ChainLink code and release a cheaper token with the same functionality?

I've heard that you shouldn't invest in a protocol because protocols don't make money. Or is that statement misguided?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:06:20 2018 No.8373488

>>8373480
reply to this:

ChainLink is a distributed/decentralized network. So for what you are proposing, there will be a multitude of Nodes each connected to one or more "sports data" providers.

You would code your smartcontract to create a kind of synthetic consensus, accessing nodes based on various metrics of trust.

You can tell the smart contract to pull data from 100 nodes: 50 free nodes that offer free sports data 40 mid tier nodes that have 2 or more sports data feeds at reduced price, and 10 premium nodes that each have 10 or more sports data feeds + a LINK Bond + SGX Security etc (whatever metrics will be available) and then process that data for accuracy, and from that you can create a consensus of data truth/trust. Some reasonable sense of trust.

IE 100 of 100 queries report x is true then x is true

It's really left up to the smart contract coder to decide, this is what Sergey means by ChainLink is designed to be flexible.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LINKTrader/comments/744ve8/value_of_link_token/

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:12:00 2018 No.8373547

Missing the point that these agreements require contract managers, admin and if it goes badly then lawyers.
One provider will not present all information. Having multiple providers increases cost, maintenance and overhead.

The aim of chain link is to reduce the need for contract managers, lawyers, business folk and tech staff.

Link won't explode overnight, but if it can provide a marketplace of reliable information (reputation of nodes etc) it will be the Amazon of information.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:15:27 2018 No.8373592 If link becomes a massive data provider, then mainstream data providers will start to provide highly reliable information by establishing reputable nodes

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:21:11 2018 No.8373654

>>8373238
Not really, this was already known. Link has short term potential, but no one thought that if smart contracts became a thing people would use a dongle forever. Link could still get to a few dollars before being made obsolete, that's why we buy.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:22:51 2018 No.8373666

>>8372854
yes you have to pay for APIs
did you think everything was free on the internet ?
node owner will buy API auth and serve that data, that was always the plan.
you didn't seriously think somebody running a node would serve the free data from Yahoo! Finance did you ?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:27:24 2018 No.8373718

>>8373480
That's why its a race against time. If ChainLink is not out and adapted massively, then it's game over for CL. CL is a middleware, companies will pay to use it... IF it's cheaper to use CL then to develop their own oricles for accurate off blockchain info. People can copy CL's codes, but without reputable node operators, it's meaningless. This is (hopefully), why Sergey is so silent on marketing. Without a working product, along with first mover advantage, it's game over for CL.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:42:31 2018 No.8373864

I haven't read the whitepaper so this might be 100% incorrect but my understanding is once you own enough Link you can control a node and generate passive income but via what? Are you doing something similar to mining to move data around? Are you going to need 100tb of storage for your node to generate any fucking thing like storj?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:45:08 2018 No.8373899

>>8373864
originally data providers were going to be give a reputation rating based on many factors, one of which was the amount of link held which was supposed to drive up the demand for link because data providers were going to hoard it. more recently, they said reputation would be provided by third parties, throwing that whole thing up in the air.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:45:27 2018 No.8373904 >>8373435 >Fuck off back to rebit, cuck >LINK $1000 EOY The guy has valid arguments, you can't just go like this.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:47:07 2018 No.8373925 >>8373899 Source please, did not know about this. Amount of token owned still play a role in reputation i assume?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:50:19 2018 No.8373972

>>8373925
honestly I cant remember the source it might have been a tweet from chainlink or a screencaped rory post. hopefully someone can dig it up

desu I dont know how third party reputation providers would know how much link a node is storing so idk. plus each reputation provider would have a different algorithm for calculating rep.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:53:08 2018 No.8374010

They way I understand this project is that Link works as an intermediary between a business databasai and "the internet/block changes." So we have a smart contract full of if/then statements that allow external data to read/write on Link client's d.b. Having "trusted certification" or basically granting access to randoms online is beyond retarded and would be abused instantly.

Nodes & oracles act as automaton proof-readers and 3rd-party verification agents. When Sergy is done it would be nigh impossible to poison the system aside from a driveby style DdOs that couldn't really accomplish much anyhow.

Decentralized access in practice is like an impenetrable castle. Eventually market-grade tech will be able crack shit like this but I don't think BASED UNCLE SAM will allow normans to buy supercomputers anytime soon.

-t 92.97 linklet

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:53:29 2018 No.8374016 File: 118 KB, 1014x871, 1491566674419.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8373972 >>8373925 here we go

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:55:57 2018 No.8374051

>>8373899
You still need to stake Linkies to pay for potential penalties.
Also people think staking and owning a node will be a bonanza, but when you factor in the cost of running a server at scale + the cost of subscribing to APIs, it will be a significant investment to start up a node. And as the network grows and more people figure out how to run nodes, concurrence will drive the prices down.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:58:23 2018 No.8374084

>>8374051
right but if there's no reputation reason to hoard link, you'd only need a relatively small amount of link because you can buy more if you run out. and if you never fail to deliver, you'd automatically start hoarding link and could start dumping on a continuous basis to convert to btc or fiat.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:58:33 2018 No.8374086 >>8373899 The amount of link you hold inherently increases the trust. The system punished people who provided bad data by fining them link. Scammers won’t want to put up a lot of link since they lose it when they get caught.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:58:48 2018 No.8374090 >>8374051 Can I do this in an apartment with enough time n money?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 01:59:24 2018 No.8374097 >>8374090 no noone is using chainlink right now

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:00:29 2018 No.8374110 >>8374097 In the future you cuck

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:02:53 2018 No.8374141 >>8374084 Shit, the price of CL is really 100% speculative, until more details come out. I was under the assumption more link ownership means more rep, regardless who assigns the reputation score.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:03:18 2018 No.8374148

>>8369656
Actually, RLC does have a staking mechanism that could be used for that.

Not saying it will supplant link. Link will be the first mover and is far more developed and specialized for the use case. If someone built and oracle system using iexec then it would probably already be too late.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:05:50 2018 No.8374180 >>8374141 idk ask vornth he'd know more than me. all i know is that the chainlink team arent determining how reputation is controlled and are leaving it up to third parties.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:10:20 2018 No.8374256

>>8374086
>The amount of link you hold inherently increases the trust.
i'm not so sure. all I really care about is if the node has enough link to complete my one contract. if it does, great. if it doesn't, well fuck. lets say a node has one million link. if it fails to deliver it loses (say) 3 link, same effect to me if it failed to deliver when it had exactly 3 link.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:12:40 2018 No.8374293 >>8372854 Can someone refute this?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:15:10 2018 No.8374322 >>8368756 This is why I invest in LINK. Not because of wealth although that's an outside possibility but because I want to destroy the legal profession the cause of most cancer in modern society.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:17:21 2018 No.8374345 Is LINK dead? First time I've been considering selling my 20k linkies...this is some serious FUD

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:19:17 2018 No.8374366 >>8374021

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:21:20 2018 No.8374388

>>8374090
It depends what you mean by in an apartment.
I wouldn't recommend doing it on your own server that you run in your living room. Suppose there's a power outage and your node goes down, you will be penalized for the downtime.
Get some service that's distributed and reliable like AWS, Azure, Digital Ocean... and set up your nodes on there.

>>8374084
I don't really understand the problem. You need to stake a lot of LINK not because of reputation but because of the number of smart contracts that you provide data to. Let's say you offer a 100 LINK penalty fee per contract, you will need to have 10k LINKs available to be able to handle 100 contracts. So there's an incentive to hoard just because then you can serve more customers.

It's good that a node's reputation is not entirely based on the amount of LINKs though. Otherwise it'd be impossible to have competition. If a little guy only has a few linkies but a long history and a perfect record, he shouldn't be ranked lower than somebody that has tons of linkies. Many small nodes are better for the system than a few huge ones.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:21:36 2018 No.8374389 >>8374366 why would stakes be rivalrous though?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:23:04 2018 No.8374403
File: 643 KB, 1000x581, 1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8374345
Yeah. You should have been suspicious when no one but /biz/ was talking about it. More suspicious when most responses to concerns were just dismissed or memed. But this is the nail in the coffin.

A Chainlink developer just got roasted in a debate with a nobody, and the entire echochamber of /biz/ linkies can't even formulate a response. If the developers and investors can't argue against a main, central, conceptual flaw with the entire products foundation... It's time to sell anon.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:25:31 2018 No.8374424 >>8374389 Depends how much security is required, otherwise a node could fuck up multiple contracts at once and only lose the one bond, but that may end up being considered an edge case.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:27:43 2018 No.8374439

>>8374403

There were several answers provided to your points, you've just conveniently ignored them.
And johnny isn't a ChainLink dev. He's planning on running a ChainLink pool independently and, as you could see if you were the gitter, he's still clueless about many aspects of the product. (Not to say he can't deliver the pool or that he's not talented, just that he doesn't have a full understanding of the code and where the project is heading since he's not a core dev).

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:28:38 2018 No.8374455

>>8374388
the difference is capture here >>8374021 "Assuming stakes are rivalous". I was assuming stakes were a competition between node operators, as was the rest of /biz/.
>>8374424
There's no competition here. You just load up 1,000 link, or however much you need to clear your contracts and sell any extra you get. Node operators will be continuously dumping Link to fiat instead of hoarding it as the white paper implied.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:29:42 2018 No.8374465 >>8372854 Can someone refute this? This is very valid FUD

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:32:51 2018 No.8374497 I just read over a fuck load of that nootropic guys posts on reddit, he knows a shit ton about crypto. Fuck, LINK was what I thought was the last real moonshot but now I have to settle for ETH and it's 10x over the next 5 years.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:32:55 2018 No.8374498

>>8372854
In this scenario there is no reason for ethereum to exist and he has a flair of 10k eth. Lmao whata hypocrite. In the end, buy bitcoin or ripple. You can fork the former to incorporate privacy, smart contracts and oracles. Ethereum has no reason to exist in this scenario.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:33:57 2018 No.8374510 >>8367028 this

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:35:03 2018 No.8374519

>>8374455
I wasn’t very clear, I was intending to distinguish between the cases where each contract locks away part of the stake as its own individual bond, versus the stake on the node being available to potentially pay out penalties on every contract it is servicing, which would be less secure from the contract purchasers perspective, but allow the same capital cost to be spread amongst multiple contracts, lowering fees proportionally.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:38:32 2018 No.8374572 >>8374465 No it's not. See: >>8374498 >>8373666 >>8368806

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:38:57 2018 No.8374578 Should we tweet General Nazarov now that he is "active" on twitter?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:41:42 2018 No.8374612 >solutions already exists >Just make a new block chain Come on

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:42:56 2018 No.8374621

>>8374455
Yes I get what you mean. There could still be competition in the sense that users might want to go with whoever offers the highest penalty fees for maximum security. Whether that will be part of the third's parties' ranking system or not is up to them, not me.

But there is also competition in terms of staking. A contract is not necessarily instantaneous. Say you have a contract that needs data a week from now. Your linkies are unavailable for at least that long. Now if you want to get more contracts, you need to up your stake. So there's an incentive to constantly stake large amounts so that you remain "solvent" at all times and can take on as many contracts as possible.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:44:19 2018 No.8374643
File: 38 KB, 467x221, 5957280f2149c6201bb5d286_image bbb.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8366902
I will admit this guy has a deeper understanding of the nuances of chainlink vs a centralized oracle.
I will nontheless attempt to refute his devaluation of my favorite coin!
His argument is that a decentralized oracle is pointless using a centralized data source, and SSL means that data cannot be corrupted already. This is age old FUD around biz. I've heard this a dozen times.
1. IMO the best use for chainlink has always been cross blockchain querying for smart contracts. Let's say banks adopt blockchain (decent likelihood.) They will have to send data to each other's private blockchains. Then it will really make sense for a decentralized oracle as the data flow will go
decentralized->decentralized->decentralized
instead of
decentralized -> centralized-> decentralized

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:46:52 2018 No.8374674

I have not read the whole thread, are you aware that the validity of the information managed by LINK is also given by the number of tokens that each node has and the wallet of each node that serves as liability insurance if the data provided is manipulated? LINK offers much greater protection than any notary or lawyer because it responds automatically without the need for additional steps if the node does not provide the same information originally received.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:48:45 2018 No.8374697

>>8372854
LMAO at how y'all are making this questionable-at-best FUD look like some game-changing shit
Don't mind me, though....I understand we're all just trying to keep the price down to accumulate more
Just pretend my post is a link marine in denial and carry on...if you guys can drive the price down to 10 cents with this, that'd be great
May I suggest screencapping that redditor's arguments against LINK and spamming it repeatedly on /biz/ for full effect?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:49:09 2018 No.8374699 >>8374643 those private blockchains wouldnt even be accessible for people running chainlink nodes, theyre PRIVATE

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:49:21 2018 No.8374703

>>8374643
2.Another advantage to decentralized oracle is the uptime. Smartcontracts draw value from absolutes; programmatically guaranteed to execute given a certain criteria set for eternity (hypothetically) with 0 tamperability. If I wanted it to work 99.999% of the time, I might just use a centralized oracle, and a centralized programmatic contract for that matter But I want this to work for eternity, with 99.99% (repeating) reliability. Hence the desirability for decentralized oracles

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:51:23 2018 No.8374722 >>8374699 Not private in a sense that they aren't queryable by a public entity, private in the sense that they are personally owned forks of a hyperledger/ethereum blockchain for private use

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:52:31 2018 No.8374727

>>8374465
I think that this underestimates the significance of the generality of the ChainLink network. In the case of APIs alone, the limiting case looks like API providers directly triggering smart contracts with the results of their feeds, essentially subsuming the role of the node.

Are the API providers going to individually maintain adapters and run nodes for every smart contract platform they want to work with? Whose standard will they use?

What if they want to decentralise their own internal infrastructure and limit single points of failure, by hosting multiple API exit points, but still want to aggregate the results?

It’s clear that this points in the direction of specialisation, with the best move by the API operators being to sell access at market rates and leave it to other specialised entities to perform the roles of blockchain connectivity and data aggregation.

Then there is the fact that the ChainLink network will provide a fully general interface to other blockchains, because the most comprehensible and general way for two blockchains to interact without having mutual structural dependencies is to treat them as black-box off chain resources.

Think! Not everyone is a computer systems expert by default, but these are the kinds of questions that intelligent investors would have already asked themselves and satisfactorily resolved, not to mention the existing partners such as *fucking Zeppelin* who can probably be relied on to have done so.

Are you de-fudded yet?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:53:37 2018 No.8374737 >>8374674 >>8374697 I'm unironically a brainlet. So LINK is able to maintain information integrity and this fudder is wrong? I really don't want to sell but the fud is starting to get to me, this redditfag seems very smart

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:56:35 2018 No.8374769 >>8374727 Thank you for the well thought out response anon...I have to admit though that reddit user is knowledgeable.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 02:57:21 2018 No.8374776

>>8374737
yes. sell now.
the people here are just trying to bamboozle you with technical linguo.
who would you rather trust? /biz/ or reddit?
look deep into your heart.
now go and it that sell button.
you can get a nice stack of dentacoin with the money

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:00:40 2018 No.8374811

>>8374643
3. Now lets understand that all smartcontracts will require an oracle service to query off chain data. Since we're already using Chainlink for our cross-blockchain queries, plus the added benefit of best-in-industry uptime (by a wide margin), couldn't it make sense to just use chainlink for our centralized data source queries as well? After all, chainlink's technology is the oracle trusted by swift, the canary (albatros) in the coalmine? (If swift drops sergey's POC we are all forever BTFO)

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:02:30 2018 No.8374829 Guide to growing wealth. When there are 5 link fud threads running on biz and no shill ones. Buy 1000$ link. When there are 5 link shill threads running on link and no fud ones. sell 1000$ link. Convert profit into link. repeat.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:04:03 2018 No.8374843 >>8374727 Nice one, capping this to sleep well through the next round of FUD

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:05:27 2018 No.8374859

>>8374737
Yes, the goal of maintaining data integrity is one of Chainlink's priorities through a series of guarantees (such as an SLA). This is not speculation, Thomas and Rory of Chainlink said this in Slack and telegram group. They are also working on chainlink nodes can be audited through external software (I do not remember exactly the name) and do not forget that Chainlink seeks to adapt to ISO regulations. One of their priorities has already been to adapt to ISO20022 in order to work with SWIFT.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:11:20 2018 No.8374911 >>8372854 I... Fuck I'm selling, fuck you biz

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:13:15 2018 No.8374930 >>8374911 If you hold eth, sell it too, because it's useless in that scenario. The same applies to all other smart contract platforms.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:13:48 2018 No.8374934 >>8374256 But if it would lose 30 or 300 link then it might interest you. That's how staking works: you lose your stake if you fail the transfer. You stake more, you risk more, people trust you more.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:14:06 2018 No.8374935 >>8366902 Guide to growing wealth. When there are 5 link fud threads running on biz and no shill ones. Buy 1000$ link. When there are 5 link shill threads running on link and no fud ones. sell 1000$ link. Convert profit into link. repeat.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:24:52 2018 No.8375027 >>8374930 Brainlet here...how is ETH useless in that scenario?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 03:30:43 2018 No.8375093

>>8374498
You're right. There is almost no reason for ETH to exist. A simple multisig protocol can do anything that's practically needed of smart contracts. There's no reason to execute code on-chain when you can instead have any amount of oracles that are required to sign your transaction for it to go through. The end result is the same, the only difference is that ETH is a bit more decentralized unless you use dozens of oracles, which you can do.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 05:18:25 2018 No.8375175
File: 224 KB, 728x538, chainlink PoC.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8372854
>hurrdurr APIs will just sign their data
The APIs would have to become hundreds of times more complex and demanding to connect their data to any and all cryptographic back-ends (blockchains, DLTs, smart contract platforms, ...).
The financial industry alone makes BILLIONS of API calls every day, none of which currently involve smart contracts yet.
Nobody is going to turn their handy little API into a sprawling abomination just for smart contracts.

And that's just for the basic connection of data to blockchains. There's a whole other level of complexity beyond that called "smart oracles".
Any transaction that is more complex than
>query API
>???
>profit
will need data from different sources to be aggregated, compounded, synchronized, triggered, stored, ... on a blockchain backing, in compliance with SLA and other rules and regulations.
See pic for an example of such a complex transaction.
APIs can't do that, and users won't code this shit themselves any more than they will all code their own OS.
Certainly not the financial industry, which is still using a Cobol back-end and outsources literally EVERYTHING that isn't their core business.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 05:31:28 2018 No.8375283

>>8375093
That's not to say you can't find justified niche cases for ETH, but everything we have so far doesn't really point out to there being too many useful cases. LINK has a bigger problem, since it's all about a limited number of data sources, and those data sources can and will act as oracles themselves, cutting the need for the LINK middleman

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 05:47:55 2018 No.8375421

>>8375175
>be big company
>decide to use smart contracts for something
>notice you need external data from a provider
you now have two options
>buy tons of LINK tokens for a considerable sum of money, connect you contract to the ChainLink adapter, pay fees to the LINK network forever for all API calls
or
>contact the provider
>ask for them to provide an oracle instead, which is not a tough job especially with tools aimed at making that easy
>never have to pay extra fees to the ChainLink network, never have to tolerate the increased chance of failure a middleman network brings

>will need data from different sources to be aggregated, compounded, synchronized, triggered, stored
In the end all you want to do on a distributed ledger is to move value or store data conditionally, anything else can happen off-chain. Data comes from external sources? Those external sources can perform the manipulation as well, you already have to trust them to provide the correct data so it's not a big deal if they also perform the operations you need. After the oracles are done, you either make a transaction or store a piece of data. Executing the entirety of code on a distributed ledger is only useful when the contract has absolutely zero dependencies of third parties, as soon as they're introduced you have to trust them either way and running the rest of the contract on a distributed platform brings no further value.

This makes the entire concept of complex smart contracts of questionable value, as far as I can see it. Either you have toy programs using no external data, or you just let oracles do everything since decentralization is only as strong as the weakest link.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 05:51:34 2018 No.8375464

>>8375421
>contact the provider
>ask for them to provide an oracle instead
You're going to ask the data provider to provide an oracle?
Why would you do that, when there are already third-party oracle providers?

>Data comes from external sources? Those external sources can perform the manipulation as well
So you would ask the data source to process data in accordance with your SLA, ISO standard, national regulations, ... ?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 05:53:59 2018 No.8375492 >>8374935 I need to try this index.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 05:55:00 2018 No.8375500 >>8366902 Ark solved the oracle problem but nobody seems to care. Linkies need to surrender to the Ark.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 05:55:33 2018 No.8375508

>>8375421
>Those external sources can perform the manipulation as well, you already have to trust them to provide the correct data so it's not a big deal if they also perform the operations you need.
This is so childish it's kinda cute.

This is like saying "just ask the company that made your car to drive you around. They already made your car so it's not a big deal if they also drive you around".

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:00:14 2018 No.8375557

>>8375464
>You're going to ask the data provider to provide an oracle?
Yes, why not? If I'm a big company, would I instead prefer to keep paying middleman fees for the rest of the lifetime of the contract? Especially when offering a DLT API could eventually be of minimal effort to a provider, when the strongest ledgers win out and everybody provides oracles for them by default.

>So you would ask the data source to process data in accordance with your SLA, ISO standard, national regulations, ... ?
If they provide the data, I'm sure they can also process it and remain compliant. You can use different oracles to process the data if you so wish, but that's suboptimal, just like using a distributed ledger to do that when the providers already are the source of truth. If you think regulations can't get around this, why do you think they can get around the problems of smart contracts (namely, even recognizing their validity as legal contracts, solving disputes etc)

>>8375508
Oh, I'm childish, and not the guy who thinks we're going to the moon?
> just ask the company that made your car to drive you around
This is a complete non-analogy. What you're saying I should use a different manufacturer to provide the AI for my self-driving car because I don't trust the car maker.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:02:40 2018 No.8375573

>>8375557
>Yes, why not?
Same reason you don't ask the company that made your car to drive you around.

>If they provide the data, I'm sure they can also process it and remain compliant.
Yes, and the company that made my car can surely also drive me around. Everyone that worked on my car probably has a driver's licence, so there are many people available to act as my chauffeur.

>This is a complete non-analogy.
It's perfectly apt, actually.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:10:34 2018 No.8375653

>>8375557
>Yes, why not?
To add; if the data provider himself also has an oracle, then that's fine. You can use that as well. The result isn't going to be any more reliable than a third-party oracle, but it's another oracle in the mix if nothing else.
But to pretend like the only oracle provider should be the data source is stupid.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:11:01 2018 No.8375655

>>8375573
But since you have n providers worth of decentralization, this is different. If you use ETH and LINK, you'll have to pay LINK to get the data the providers already give you, and ETH god knows how much to execute your code. Meanwhile your contract is no more safer (arguably less so) than if it was processed by the data sources to start with. So, is having somebody at the API provider do an extra rounds of communication between other participants and the ledger a huge deal? Your assumption of LINK's and ETH's usefulness rests on it being hugely tasking, but how can it be when even the ETH network that's slower than a raspberry pi can handle it? All you need to do is provide the additional code for the provider to execute, that's it.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:18:17 2018 No.8375729

>>8375655
>if it was processed by the data sources to start with
>>is having somebody at the API provider do an extra rounds of communication between other participants and the ledger a huge deal?
If the data source did the oracle computation itself, then that's one oracle node.
The point of decentralization is to have more than one for cases that need/want it.

And the API source is not going to process your smart contract for you. They are not going to process data in accordance with your SLA, ISO standard, national regulations, ...
API sources will be financial institutions for instance, and they themselves outsource this kind of thing.

Plus, more complex transactions span multiple API sources, so which one would handle the overarching process?

>Your assumption of LINK's and ETH's usefulness rests on it being hugely tasking
What?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:28:48 2018 No.8375827

>>8375729
>If the data source did the oracle computation itself, then that's one oracle node.
You can have as many redundant data sources as you want as oracles. The oracles may communicate with each other in any ways they want, but in the end they need to reach an agreement and sign the transaction off the escrow account, or create a transaction to store data. These things don't require turing-completeness, you can produce far safer contracts with elementary blocks and smarter distribution of responsibility, instead of having a massive chunk of funky solidity code running on the ETH network.

>And the API source is not going to process your smart contract for you. They are not going to process data in accordance with your SLA, ISO standard, national regulations, ...
And car manufacturers aren't gonna be the ones creating the self-driving cars. Except, you know, they are.
>API sources will be financial institutions for instance, and they themselves outsource this kind of thing.
>Plus, more complex transactions span multiple API sources, so which one would handle the overarching process?
Like I've said several times, the oracles can converse in any way necessary. It's not a strain on API providers, and only the end result of either signing a certain transaction or not is what matters.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:35:40 2018 No.8375882

>>8375827
>>8375729
Just think, it's all about the distribution of trust / responsibility. If two approaches given to a company are functionally equivalent, will they go with the fishy and more costly ETH+LINK combo or instead figure out a simple one-off contract with the providers to just take care of the remaining busywork as well? I see the latter option as far more likely for industrial-scale uses in the near future, and in the very far future the entire scene will probably be completely different.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:39:24 2018 No.8375905

>>8375827
>You can have as many redundant data sources as you want as oracles.
The point is to have multiple oracles per data source too.

>And car manufacturers aren't gonna be the ones creating the self-driving cars. Except, you know, they are.
Self-driving cars aren't decentralized oracles.

>the oracles can converse in any way necessary
The question is who is going to handle the smart oracle part?
What data source is going to collate, compound, trigger, store, ... all the data from the various data sources?

>It's not a strain on API providers
lmao, let's see;
Currently API providers provide data via API.
Under your system, they would also have to adapt and connect that data to any and all blockchains, and handle all the additional complexity for processing complex smart contracts (collate, compound, trigger, store, ... all the data from the various data sources).

Your system makes APIs infinitely more complex and demanding. Not to mention requiring APIs to become something else entirely.
This would also mean the entire ecosystem would be fragmented, since every API will have their own code tweaks or fundamentals.

All while it is much simpler to have a third party query APIs and do all of this itself, as a common platform.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:39:59 2018 No.8375909 >>8375882 Hasn't this already been discussed for the 10th time, you aren't saying anything new dude

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:40:26 2018 No.8375914 >>8375882 >I see the latter option as far more likely for industrial-scale uses in the near future That's because you're clueless.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:43:06 2018 No.8375941 For those fudding around API, please google "PSD2" and educate yourself before posting. Thank you.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:50:56 2018 No.8376029

>>8375905
>The point is to have multiple oracles per data source too.
Why, when that doesn't improve the security of your contract at all? It all still comes off n data sources, adding fluff on top of that doesn't make things better

>Self-driving cars aren't decentralized oracles.
Nor drivers. The point is, if somebody provides the car you trust, it's a natural task for them to also provide the self-driving tech as well. Smart contracts have opened a new area of responsibility for API providers.

>The question is who is going to handle the smart oracle part?
The oracles signing the final transaction off. That's all that really matters from the perspective of the ledger. There's no need to store intermediary data in the ledger, unless that improves trust, and if so you can just store it there.

>Under your system, they would also have to adapt and connect that data to any and all blockchains
You could make the same argument for car manufacturers, yet they're already providing GPSes and it works better than third-party GPS. Same will go for AI. Same can go for API providers in relation to smart contracts.
>collate, compound, trigger, store, ... all the data from the various data sources
This isn't a huge amount of work, if Ethereum can pull it off, API providers will certainly be able to do it effortlessly. In the process they'll open a new revenue stream. Tell me how this is not the optimal solution?

>since every API will have their own code tweaks or fundamentals.
It's all about the relations between clients and providers. The provider offers whatever its clients request.

>do all of this itself
You mean on an expensive, inefficient and fishy third-party platform? Does that sound appealing to a company handling real value? You still need to program the contract, whether you deploy it on ETH or the API providers.

>>8375941
Everybody's aware. But how does it improve the situation of distributed ledgers? It obsoletes several use cases.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 06:57:49 2018 No.8376092

>>8376029
>Why, when that doesn't improve the security of your contract at all?
Except it does.
Single oracles are single points of failure, attack, or tampering.

>The point is, if somebody provides the car you trust, it's a natural task for them to also provide the self-driving tech as well.
Tons of shit is outsourced by car companies, starting with the mining of metal.

>The oracles signing the final transaction off.
And what data source is this then?

>There's no need to store intermediary data in the ledger
Of course there is. For instance if you're aggregating different interest rates from different banks, the outcome should be documented in a tamper-proof way.

>You could make the same argument for car manufacturers, yet they're already providing GPSes and it works better than third-party GPS.
Do they also launch their own satellites?

>This isn't a huge amount of work
Neither is yardwork, but the bank isn't going to come and do that for me too.

>It's all about the relations between clients and providers. The provider offers whatever its clients request.
You mean the data provider?
Which one if there are multiple?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:01:33 2018 No.8376136
File: 56 KB, 403x448, 1513751543149.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>every fucking thread people use elon musk scifi tier bullshit examples for chainlink usecases, instead of just accepting that revolutionizing the financial industry would be more than enough for its price to skyrocket through the roof

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:01:46 2018 No.8376137

>>8376029
>Everybody's aware. But how does it improve the situation of distributed ledgers? It obsoletes several use cases.
PSD2 forces banks to open up their internal APIs.
So your whole "muh data source will be the oracl" schtick is out the window, since any third-party oracle will have access to the data sources.

It's pretty amazing how completely out of touch you are.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:03:44 2018 No.8376154 >>8376137 >any third-party oracle and those are decentralized oracles?

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:04:26 2018 No.8376164

Wow a lot of confusion in this thread, though I'm sure some of it is intentional fud. I implore you to ask these questions in the slack. So far none of these concerns actually address issues the team hasn't thought about and that Thomas couldn't respond to convincingly. Sergey's appearance at SXSW makes it clear they've thought about a lot of the concerns people are expressing ITT.

However I can see why it looks real to people who have a fundamental misunderstanding of smart contracts and decentralized oracles and data providers in general.

Also one thing to note is that smart contracts and chainlink are not the right solution for everything. A lot of the examples people throw around on this board are not good uses of chainlink and smart contracts. That's okay. There's more than enough that is.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:04:46 2018 No.8376167 >>8376136 Link has always been held to a massive double standard. Tons of coins have mooned on WAAAAY less, but somehow Link is getting scrutinized down to the atomic level.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:05:03 2018 No.8376173

>>8376092
>Single oracles are single points of failure, attack, or tampering.
You don't need a blockchain to protect against those. Ever heard of encryption and hashing?
>Tons of shit is outsourced by car companies, starting with the mining of metal.
Because it's a huge undertaking for them to take, they can't just start mining and be more profitable than a mining company. An API provider, however, can spin up a rusty PC to execute the rare smart contract processing its client require (at better efficiency than ETH), and rake in profits.
>And what data source is this then?
The oracles provided by the data sources. The entities you trust to give you the right data being the entities you also trust to do the rest. There's no practical need to complicate it further.
>Of course there is.
Well, then just do that.
>Do they also launch their own satellites?
No, because that's a massive undertaking, in contrast to embedding GPSes, which is both easy and profitable. Just like executing code on an API server.
>Neither is yardwork, but the bank isn't going to come and do that for me too.
Getting more and more ridiculous with the analogies
>You mean the data provider?
>Which one if there are multiple?
Each provider does whatever part is required of it. There's no one global answer to that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:05:47 2018 No.8376180 >>8376154 By nature, decentralization implies lots of third parties.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:07:34 2018 No.8376196 >>8376137 No shit it's the same guy in every thread saying the same things about APIs and there are simpler solutions, everyone just do yourselves a favour and not defend Link anymore we know it's a good project

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:09:24 2018 No.8376216 >>8376180 yeah...but that doesn't answer my question. name a decentralized oracle other than LINK, i'll wait.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:10:44 2018 No.8376227

>>8376173
>You don't need a blockchain to protect against those. Ever heard of encryption and hashing?
Lel, ever heard of 'trustlessness'?

>An API provider, however, can spin up a rusty PC to execute the rare smart contract processing its client require
>executing code on an API server [is easy]
Then why do banks outsource 99% of all their IT needs?

>The oracles provided by the data sources.
So the data sources have to work together to create the overarching smart oracle?

>Each provider does whatever part is required of it. There's no one global answer to that.
Well there needs to be a global answer (e.g. a 'smart oracle') to complex transactions like in this pic: >>8375175

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:11:55 2018 No.8376237 >>8376216 I was mostly referring to decentralized oracles that are part of the Chainlink network. All nodes of the CL network are effectively "third parties".

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:13:06 2018 No.8376246 >>8376216 My cl node <:^)

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:13:45 2018 No.8376250 >>8376196 >everyone just do yourselves a favour and not defend Link anymore we know it's a good project Yeah, I've been doing exactly this for weeks now, but somehow got suckered in again.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:15:10 2018 No.8376257 File: 64 KB, 591x636, 1496376811202.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8376164 Refute OP's argument and I'll never talk about Link again

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:15:33 2018 No.8376260

>>8376227
>Lel, ever heard of 'trustlessness'?
You're trusting the provider already...
>Then why do banks outsource 99% of all their IT needs?
Well, they can still outsource the creation and hosting of their oracles, and still bypass LINK and perhaps ETH
>So the data sources have to work together to create the overarching smart oracle?
No, they can just work together off-chain
>Well there needs to be a global answer (e.g. a 'smart oracle') to complex transactions like in this pic: >>8375175
Perhaps, perhaps not. But it's a big risk to rely on that exact thing happening, especially when we don't know how that's gonna impact token prices of ETH and LINK

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:16:33 2018 No.8376271 >>8376237 i misread your earlier post, thought you were implying that LINK was useless because there are dozens of other (centralized) options available. my mistake.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:17:22 2018 No.8376278

>>8376173
The point is that you can't trust one specific bank so you will have multiple banks feeding numbers to the network and then the network reaches a consensus on the current figure of X security for example. Same with other applications, such as weather stats, radioactivity readings, whatever.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:19:02 2018 No.8376296

>>8376260
>You're trusting the provider already...
You also need to rely the oracle computation. Making this step decentralized aids in that.

>Well, they can still outsource the creation and hosting of their oracles, and still bypass LINK and perhaps ETH
Sure.
Or they can use a well-established common framework.

>No, they can just work together off-chain
A 'smart oracle' has many off-chain components, yes.
So which data source will provide the overarching 'smart oracle' services?

>Perhaps, perhaps not.
Definitely yes.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:21:34 2018 No.8376322

>>8376260
>>8376173
>>8376029
>>8375882
>>8375827
>>8375655
>>8375557
>>8375421
>>8375283
I'm done playing.

See >>8375941
and >>8376137

Your whole "data sources will be the oracle" point is moot.
Any third party will be able to access the banks' internal APIs.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:23:54 2018 No.8376337

>>8376322
Plus, without a common, overarching framework you will never be able to set up complex transactions like in this pic: >>8375175
If every data source were to incorporate its own oracle, there would be no trustlessness at the oracle level, and you'd still need that overarching 'smart oracle'.

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:26:01 2018 No.8376358

>>8372854
You faggots made me buy this shit at over a dollar with your non stop shilling but I fucking swear I've had it with this link bullshit, you stinky linkies swore up and down it would be $3 by February but we're off by a favor of 10 kek. This shit sing going no where but down. Gonna sell my 10k stack of link before this shit sprirals down to sub 20 cents cause that's exactly where it's headed.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:26:37 2018 No.8376361 >>8366980 Hey have an updoot, also enjoy this gold haha superior redditor

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:28:30 2018 No.8376372 >>8370976 he really didn't "lose the debate", though he schooled some dude who clearly didn't know what chainlink actually did wtf are you talking about

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:29:15 2018 No.8376383 File: 34 KB, 817x443, 1519382722034.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8366980

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:30:22 2018 No.8376393 >>8372381 >hurrdurr no verification of source correctness That's not what oracles do. >the 51% attack is a ridiculous notion of security L M A O just how new is this faggot to crypto?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:34:50 2018 No.8376431 >>8366902 Thanks just bought 500k

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:41:43 2018 No.8376492 >>8376358 buy high, sell low, well played.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 07:58:58 2018 No.8376663 >>8372381 Holy shit I fucking hate redditors spouting whatever retarded babble in their heads that makes them think they won the argument

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:06:09 2018 No.8376730 >>8368933 Wow why nobody thought of that!!!

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:08:58 2018 No.8376757 >>8373899 They never said that you lying faggot. Post source or fuck off

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:09:17 2018 No.8376763

>>8376167

The GOAT indicator for looking into having a stack. Hell, LINK is the true dichotomy of biz, promoting intelligent discussion and meticulous analysis.

74k here. I like the heavy debates equally as much as the memes. I frequently argue against LINK to keep my perspective broad. Not a techy though, so couldn’t hold my own against turbo autist pros

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:22:42 2018 No.8376906 >>8376337 >>8376322 >>8376278 I actually hope it works out for you, but I'm not convinced that I understand the implications well enough to be able to comfortably hold. Good luck, linkies

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:24:25 2018 No.8376936 >>8367028 You do realise 99% of human progress has been finding solutions to problems that dont exist yet? Very rarely do humans encounter a problem and then solve it. If you read more books you’d know that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:25:49 2018 No.8376946 >>8376906 It's obvious that you are missing key fundamental knowledge about the project.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:27:39 2018 No.8376976 >>8374403 he isn't an official developer and he's just started replying to him again. that guy is just pulling points out of no where with fancy words to make it seem like he's right.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:29:38 2018 No.8377003 >>8366980 zez, <3 you giga FUDers

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:30:13 2018 No.8377009

>>8376763
I've spent a lot of time debating the merits of Link early on, but have been mostly sitting back of the past months.
Still, any debate is always a learning experience, and the deeper you dig into the matter, the more the merits of Link are obvious.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:30:41 2018 No.8377012 >>8367164 My LINKs are gone!!! Wtf

Anonymous Fri Mar 16 08:31:34 2018 No.8377020

>>8376946
I'm not saying I can't be proven wrong and you guys did raise some real use cases for it. I still suspect it's gonna be relatively niche, but then again maybe not. Either way it's great that you guys are up to speed on your investment, I'll not shit up your threads with FUD a second time

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 16 09:35:32 2018 No.8377838 >>8372854 Primary data sources won't have much of a say, more and more regulation is forcing the primary data sources to open up their APIs to third parties anyway. Like PSD2. This nootropicat plebbitor has no clue what Chainlink is or does.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/biz/ - Business & Finance