/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.8380797]

Daily reminder that LINK is kill.

[Anonymous No.8380810]

>>8380797
Didn't read

[Anonymous No.8380832]

>>8380797
Daily reminder after much consideration, Sergey gave Thomas permission to respond to this on r/chainlink, where he destroyed these fools.

[Anonymous No.8380838]

>>8380797
can you shorten that? i'm not about to waste my time reading that shit

[Anonymous No.8380855]

1/3

A smart contract which could possibly hold millions of dollars needs to be evaluated end-to-end, as Sergey explains in this talk. An ideal scenario would require multiple data sources in order to validate data against peers, as discussed in our white paper in section 4.1. This is because no oracle service, decentralized or not, can validate if the obtained answer from a data source is truly correct, only that the provided answer is what the source said it was (the last few sentences of section 5.3 gives some insight into this). Using multiple data sources would obviously be optimal as it would fit in well with the trustless setting. If one data source is providing faulty information, that is easily caught before a smart contract could execute based on the data provided by nodes retrieved from other data sources.
Sometimes, utilizing multiple data sources is simply not possible because there is only one source available. When this happens, that data source would be considered as a single point of failure for the smart contract. It would be entirely up to the smart contract creator if they are willing to accept that amount of risk for their contract. However, using multiple oracles as the trigger for the smart contract, even if they're all connecting to the same source, is still advantageous over a single oracle acting as a trigger for the smart contract. This is because a centralized oracle would be considered another single point of failure.

[Anonymous No.8380861]

>>8380810
>Didn't read because I could barely understand what the hell was being talked about in the second sentence and I already went all in on LINK because /biz/ meme'd it
Fixed

[Anonymous No.8380868]

>>8380855
2/3

It seems to me like the argument of using a notary for a centralized service being better than a decentralized oracle service isn't fully acknowledging the need for an end-to-end trustless smart contract ecosystem. Regardless if the centralized oracle knows what it's processing or not, it can still go down and prevent the smart contract from executing when it needs to. Utilizing centralized services sounds like the present day, where if someone doesn't fulfill their obligation of the agreement, you sue them (which has additional costs and headaches of its own). So it makes sense why this reasoning seems valid at first glance, because that's the world we live in right now. In a trustless world, however, relying on centralized services is simply too much risk. Why would one choose to use a single data source, with a single oracle, feeding data to a decentralized smart contract?
If we have a single data source as the sole supplier of some information, what can they do as we head towards a trustless world? They could create multiple independent endpoints for their API in order to provide some level of redundancy. This would at least prevent a single endpoint from being a point of failure. However, it would still be up to the smart contract creator to determine if that reduces the risk enough to use as a factor for their contract, since it still does nothing to validate factual information.

[Anonymous No.8380875]

>>8380832
>https://www.reddit.com/r/Chainlink/comments/84u52s/can_someone_answer_this/

pwned.nl

[Anonymous No.8380888]

>>8380868
3/3

We can even take it a step further and say that the data source doesn't even want any 3rd parties connecting to their API. How would they provide their data to smart contracts? Some may say that they will create their own oracles, I don't think so. There are a lot of technical issues that need consideration before one can simply create their own oracle. How do you handle blockchain forks, rollbacks, congestion, varying gas prices, etc.? Chainlink already has solutions in place for all of those issues. It would require significantly less effort to create an external adapter for their own API and run a node (or multiple for redundancy) than to start at the beginning of creating a specialized oracle.

[Anonymous No.8380906]

>>8380797
nootropicat is so hot right now. he just utterly btfo the whole chainlink team.

[Anonymous No.8380938]

>>8380875
YOOOOOO THIS NIGGA KILLING THEM AGAIN AAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HE'S RESPONDING TO THEIR BULLSHIT AS WE SPEAK

WE WITNESSING A LIVE SLAUGHTERING

[Anonymous No.8380996]

>>8380938
get your anus ready, sergey is aboutt o shove his big chainlink into it.

this guy is going to get rekt

[Anonymous No.8381050]

>>8380810
This

[Anonymous No.8381073]

>>8380861
To:dr

[Anonymous No.8381076]

>user name nootropiccat
yep stopped reading when i saw that, fucking retards taking caffeine pills thinking they are the guy from limitless

[Anonymous No.8381082]

>>8380938
YOOOO MY NIGGER AYO FAMILY WE BE SEEIN SOME FUNNY STUFF ON REDDIT.COM

[Anonymous No.8381108]

This shit essentially boils down to supercomputes on every city. This autist can suck a cock.

[Anonymous No.8381111]

>>8380938
>would you prefer storing your coins on coinbase, or allowing 50 link nodes to decide who owns them?

[Anonymous No.8381123]

>>8380938
you sound emotionally attached, you sure everything's alright?

[Anonymous No.8381147]

CL better respond or I'm selling

This debate will decide the future of Link

[Anonymous No.8381168]

>>8380938
>That's not the question. The question is how are several link nodes better than several oracle companies with a contractual obligation
You ain't gonna use multiple oracle companies to do one API call are you?

[Anonymous No.8381171]

>>8380797
>hurr ETH will make its own oracles
All ETH can do is rip off Chainlink.
And Vitalik himself said oracle solutions would be built on top of ETH, which is supposed to be a base layer.

>hurrdurrr the APIs will make their own oracles
Regulations like PSD2 will force banks to open up their APIs anyway, it doesn't fucking matter if the APIs create their own oracles.

What a retard lol.

[Anonymous No.8381176]

>>8381111
>would you prefer storing your coins on Mt Goxx, or allowing 50 bitcoin mining pools to decide who owns them?

[Anonymous No.8381197]

>>8381111
As a Link holder myself I have to applaud him for this arguments, curious how Sergey get out of this one

[Anonymous No.8381209]

>>8381176
Really makes you think

[Anonymous No.8381221]

>>8381197
a well timed stinky fart oughto do it

[Anonymous No.8381234]

>>8381147
they already did, that was the dev
I'm honestly selling now

[Anonymous No.8381238]

[Anonymous No.8381242]

>>8381176
why not just keep the shit in my hard wallet.

[Anonymous No.8381277]

>>8381242
>my nano s will protect me from a 51% attack

[Anonymous No.8381326]

>pic related is Chainlink right now

[Anonymous No.8381341]

>>8381111
The 50 voters would vote over 51% for you to store your own coins MEW. So yes.

[Anonymous No.8381350]

>>8381277
im not talking about a nano s lol

[Anonymous No.8381375]

>>8381277
forgot to green text


>He thinks im talking about a nano s

[Anonymous No.8381385]

>>8381350
I hate to break it to you anon, but you might be clinically retarded

[Anonymous No.8381386]

>>8380938
1/10 FUD, I read better FUD here every day.
Nothing in crypto has a contractual obligation to anything. Good luck getting your shit from Oraclize, which is an LLC registered in London with banking in Singapore. If you are lucky you will get $20,000 from them, because that's what LLCs are obliged to pay in the worst case scenario.

You really want to trust multiple anonymous nodes over real people who will take your shit. The retards who stored their shit on Mt.Gox, Bitgrail and multiple other exchanges and platforms learned it the hard way.

[Anonymous No.8381418]

>>8381350
>>8381375
Just fucking lol, I hope you are just pretending to be retarded. No wallet will save you if the majority of miners decide to fuck with the blockchain moron

[Anonymous No.8381442]

This shit right here is what I've been trying to explain to every fudder.
Solving the "oracle problem" depends on your interpretation of the oracle problem. The "true data" problem will never be solved and this is not what Chainlink is about, it's not about whether some company's data stored on their own servers is absolutely correct data.

I found some article that describes what Chainlink is actually trying to solve.
>https://medium.com/@DelphiSystems/the-oracle-problem-856ccbdbd14f
>"Since an oracle determines what a smart contract sees (i.e. it controls the inputs to the smart contract) it also holds the power to control what the smart contract does in response to these inputs. This means that oracles possess an enormous amount of power when it comes to smart contracts (especially in prediction market contexts). If the oracle is compromised, so is the entire contract; this is one reason why centralized oracle services are not considered a serious solution to “The Oracle Problem” in most cases. To put it simply, as soon as you make a smart contract rely on a single central oracle, you have totally sacrificed any decentralization-related benefits (which makes it arguable whether you should be using a smart contract at all)."

[Anonymous No.8381457]

So did they announce a partnership with Swift or not?
If they haven't by now then it's never going to take off.

[Anonymous No.8381471]

>>8381418
>majority of miners decide to fuck with the blockchain moron
why would they kill the cash cow moron

[Anonymous No.8381480]

>>8381457
Yup just sell now. Don’t wait for when they said they’ll announce stuff

[Anonymous No.8381521]

How the FUCK do i buy chainLINK?

NO TRADER SELLS IT AT ALL.
and if biz is saying that its going down (and biz is ALWAYS WRONG) then its worth getting NOW.

Where do i buy/exchange for it?

[Anonymous No.8381530]

>>8381471
Holy fucking shit you retard. That's the whole fucking point. A wallet is safer than coinbase or whatever, because there is little incentive to fuck with the blockchain, even if one was able to get 51% of mining power. But if such an attack were to happen, no wallet will safe you. You don't believe that a hardware wallet downloads and stores your coins or something?

[Anonymous No.8381532]

>>8380797
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3141203

try again, faggot. why dont you do a ctrl+f search for chainlink. muh use case, muh 2 man dev team. go FUCK yourself

[Anonymous No.8381541]

>>8381457
Yes, they're developing a custom oracle for swift

[Anonymous No.8381548]

>>8381457
They never announced any partnerships with anyone. Other companies announce partnerships with LINK.
Docusign said they will be working with Sergey yesterday and there are already 4 coins that will be relying on LINK oracles in the future.

[Anonymous No.8381562]

>>8381521
binance

[Anonymous No.8381571]

written by a bizraeli. disregard

[Anonymous No.8381585]

>>8381238
>The oracle problem is about getting true data
These are the trenchbrains fuding Link, fucking L M A O.

[Anonymous No.8381606]

>>8381562
For USD or do i need to buy >memecoin or ETH to exchange?

[Anonymous No.8381619]

>>8381530
are you trying to argue just to be right or something? your arguing hypotheticals you fucking dunce

[Anonymous No.8381625]

>>8381585
Dude he's buzzin on Modafinil you wish you were on his level

[Anonymous No.8381631]

>>8381625
Wat? Is he really?

[Anonymous No.8381640]

>>8381606
ETh on coinbase or some shit then send to binance and buy link

[Anonymous No.8381655]

>>8381606
binance has no fiat pairings
buy btc/eth, transfer to binance and buy link there
>>8381619
You obviously have no idea how wallets, crypto and any of this works. I tried to correct that, but I'll stop that now.

[Anonymous No.8381661]

>Ok, so would you rather store your coins on coinbase, or in a smart contract that transfers the coins if a majority of 50 link nodes agree?
lmfao he's at it again

[Anonymous No.8381688]

>>8380797
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 No.8381709]

>>8381661
>Well yeah, I can just fork the Chainlink code, how will you deal with that?
Jesus, do these people think a minute before typing this shit?

[Anonymous No.8381726]

>>8381521
Sign up for binance (with my referral if you want 11288513), send some btc or eth on over, and buy it.

[Anonymous No.8381738]

>>8381111
>>8381661

Is this faggot trying to fud the very notion of decentralization just to take a shot at Link?

What the fuck, man.
I knew Link was subject to a double standard, but this is getting weird.

[Anonymous No.8381779]

>>8381726
I will use your code, friend.

Let's take the chainLINK train to lambo land.

[Anonymous No.8381782]

>>8381709
No he’s a meme

[Anonymous No.8381789]

>>8380797
Do not get it at this point? I'd buy link even if it crashed and burned so I'd have the top wallet. I'll run a Link node regardless of whether it's profitable. I don't think you understand OP.

[Anonymous No.8381794]

>>8381532
>https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3141203
Big if true

>>8381661
>>Ok, so would you rather store your coins on coinbase, or in a smart contract that transfers the coins if a majority of 50 link nodes agree?
What a dumb analogy, storing your own coins is not the same as transferring funds to the other party via a self-executing smart contract

>all I have to do is download code from github and boom LINK is fucking finished
>pic related

[The Majestic LYNX No.8381832]

>>8381442
This.
Fuders always jump out with their
>hurr durr single data source
bs
Imagine this you fucking brainlets
you have a friend you trust and you need to send him a letter, all yu both need is a reliable mailman, and that's what Chainlink is, it's not about making ensuring both ends are safe, it's about the part in the middle
you don't trust that source? no one is forcing you to requesting their data, it's not CL's problem

[Anonymous No.8381835]

>>8381738

[Anonymous No.8381846]

>>8381738
Some of his arguments about just having real contracts might be right for now, but it's missing the point and a bit disingenuous, at least as far as I understand it. Still, even if he's starting to repeat himself and that argument might go in circles now, a lot of his points seem fair and I would need to look more into them (once I get hopped up on piracetam and l-theanine).

[Anonymous No.8381866]

>>8381835
Holy shit this guy didn't even skim through the white paper.

Why are people even paying attention to this generic shitfud?

[Anonymous No.8381875]

>>8381835
This guy is the biggest brainlet. That's not how it will work, ChainLink will use averages, it expects that different APIs will provide slightly different results.

[Anonymous No.8381892]

>>8381835
>there is no incentive
>link assumes that majority is always going to be honest just because
HAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHA opinion fucking discarded

[Anonymous No.8381901]

>>8381866

[The Majestic LYNX No.8381924]

>>8381866
he's an idiot, every possible vector attack was worked through by some of the top minds in this bussines including Ari jules (no it's not a meme, look up his background) and some absolute faggot thinks he "exposed" the entire idea with his elementary school reasoning.

[Anonymous No.8381936]

>>8381901
That guys going to be seething after that question lol. I’m thinking 3 paragraphs

[Anonymous No.8381953]

Ok so the Oracle can only verify if the sources from other data sources is true, but not the actual data itself, am I understanding that right?

So what would stop some scammer from creating their own coin and fucking with the integrity of the data (ie: 51% dishonest nodes) and seriously inflating their value?

I guess the counter to this is, is this even the Oracle's problem to worry about?

[Anonymous No.8381955]

I'm too chicken to post there but what he talks about when he says you can use a notary is pretty much what Oraclize is doing. That approach has problems as described here:
https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/201/how-does-oraclize-handle-the-tlsnotary-secret

[Anonymous No.8381969]

>>8381779
Thanks bro
>>8381789
This. Link marines serve with honor.

[Anonymous No.8381975]

>>8381892
He's right. Link is far from the only one who's vulnerable to this (aren't they all?) But he's not wrong, no?

[Anonymous No.8381978]

>>8381521
Buy any coin on Coinbase. Transfer said coin to your Binance account (don't fuck this part up or your coins will disappear). Buy LINK with the appropriate coin pairs

[Anonymous No.8381990]

>>8381953
Then why would someone run a node connected to it and why would someone use the coin?

[Anonymous No.8381993]

>>8381866
Haters gonna hatem. This is likely coming from a competitor.

[Anonymous No.8382022]

>>8381953
The scammer would still have to have a useable coin. Otherwise the oracle wouldn't even need to bother. Coins aren't immune to basic use cases for people still, if there isn't a legitimate and genuine reason for it's existence, it will not be used.

[The Majestic LYNX No.8382034]

>>8381993
I thinks it might be this salty italian faggot from oraclize (still butthurt after Sergey wiped the floor with him at devcon) or some mobius pejeets

[Anonymous No.8382086]

>>8381936
He already responded, >>8381901 just cut it out
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/84n80w/blockchain_oracles_will_make_smart_contracts_fly/dvsqzzi/

[Anonymous No.8382089]

>>8381990
I mean in the case of a seriously centralized coin, like a few big whales own a vast majority of the coins and nodes.

But I guess that comes back to the other part "Is this even the Oracle's problem?"

Similar to the "Oracle = notary" analogy in
>>8381955
So the Oracle only verifies that the parties's representations are accurate, but not the underlying data for the representations?

I'm not very tech savy so i'm just trying to grasp this on a larger scale concept

[Anonymous No.8382099]

>>8381993
>>8382034
He has a pretty long post history, but on Eth subs only. I doubt he's a shill for anything other than Eth (and he might not know other projects as much as Eth).

[Anonymous No.8382126]

>>8381832
This. Not that difficult to understand.

[Anonymous No.8382131]

>>8382089
Yes the oracle's (chainlink's) only function is to input the data securely into the smart contract. If a contract executes on faulty data, and we know the Oracle is secure, then we know exactly where to point the finger: at the data provider.

[Anonymous No.8382137]

>>8381955
Wouldn’t be surprised if op on reddit is from oracalize. They have the same fud on their website

[Anonymous No.8382151]

>>8382099
He started posting around 3 months ago. Probably bought ATH and can't cope.

[Anonymous No.8382180]

>>8382086
Oh idk I don’t have a reddit lol

[Anonymous No.8382253]

>>8381619
Please get some fucking help. Go back to stock trading you absolute idiot, you do not understand this tech.

>muh put them on a hard wallet guise xDDDDDD

Which fucking is "allowing 50 bitcoin mining pools to decide who owns them", which is safer than storing on an exchange, which exactly the argument the guy you're trying to say is wrong is arguing.

[Anonymous No.8382349]

>>8381975
How is there no incentive if the entire concept is based around reputation and validation of the nodes to provide the most accurate and reliable data so they would be prioritized for more requests and high value requests thus getting more profit.

>Link is far from the only one who's vulnerable to this (aren't they all?)
Are you talking about the 51% attack where majority of the nodes selected for the contract would be malicious and provide inaccurate data? Then yes I believe this is what most blockchains struggle with.

[Anonymous No.8382468]

>>8381242
You do realize how the blockchain works right anon? You aren't storing the coins on any wallet be it software, hardware, or cold storage. You store your private key which gives you access to the coins on the blockchain. They never leave the blockchain

[Anonymous No.8382497]

These fud threads get fucking destroyed every time, and I just keep buying link.

[Anonymous No.8382613]

>>8381661
am i happy that i don't have to response to this bullshitw

[Anonymous No.8382754]

>>8380938
That redditard is so braindead. He's arguing about "majorities" when blockchain itself is a majority vote system.
>durrr would you rather hold your shit on coinbase or in your own wallet
retardation beyond words

[Anonymous No.8382810]

>>8382497
Ditto.

[Anonymous No.8382864]

>>8382497
>>8382810
This lol, I buy 10 linkies for every fudpost

[Anonymous No.8382875]

>>8382810
>>8382497
Can you guys just buying in honor of a fellow marine? Don’t have any spare fiat to throw in atm

[Anonymous No.8383312]

>actually screenshotting an entire reddit conversation and posting it on 4chan

kys

[Anonymous No.8383369]

>>8383312

No, anon. In the case of LINK, it's okay. I want to see the responses without going to that shithole.

[Anonymous No.8383379]

>>8380797
is this retard actually trying to argue that a centralized oracle—i.e., 100% "majority vote" all the time and one point of failure, with failure being anything from bad info to loss of communications—is better than an entire decentralized oracle network with a level of resilience to these things that is ALWAYS better than the centralized solution
this is why reddit is fucking ghey—because you can't tell these people that they are straight-up fucking retards
>that's an utterly ridiculous notion of security
>if it worked that way, there would be no reason for PoW or PoS
REPUTATION
REPUTATION AND STAKE, YOU FUD-FUCKING TECHNOBABBLING DIMWIT
IF YOU CREATED 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ORACLES TO TRY TO OVERPOWER THE CORRECT INFORMATION PROVIDED BY 30 ORACLES, BUT NOBODY HAD ANY FUCKING REASON AT ALL TO TRUST ANY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR SEPTILLIONS OF 0.00000000001 SECOND OLD, SHITTY, LOW-STAKE, LOW-T ORACLES, THEN NOBODY IS GONNA USE ANY OF YOUR SHITTY ORACLES AND YOUR ATTEMPT TO FUCK UP A CONTRACT IS GONNA FAIL CATASTROPHICALLY
IF YOU HAD ANY AT ALL STAKED, YOU'LL LOSE ALL OF YOUR FUCKING CHAINLINK AT $1,000 A PIECE
BRILLIANT FFFFFFUCKING IDEA—HIGHLY PROFITABLE, TOO

NO ORACLE SOLUTION CAN SIMPLY PULL TRUTHS OUT OF THIN AIR
NOTHING CAN DO THAT
THINGS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY
ETHEREUM ORACLES DO NOT MAGICALLY WORK THAT WAY
THEY CAN'T EVEN PROTECT YOU FROM THIS SUPPOSED 51% ATTACK, BECAUSE THEY ARE 100% CENTRALIZED, SINGLE-POINT-OF FAILURE PIECES OF SOFTWARE
VITALIK IS AWARE OF THIS, AND WAS AT LEAST HAPPY TO SEE THE DECENTRALIZATION OF ORACLES THAT CHAINLINK MAKES POSSIBLE
CHAINLINK RELIES ON MANY MULTIPLE ORACLES, SOMETIMES DRAWING DATA FROM WHAT ARE EFFECTIVELY MULTIPLE APIS
IF ONE NODE FAILS FOR WHATEVER REASON, THERE ARE DOZENS—IF NOT HUNDREDS—MORE, ALL COMPETING TO BE THE MOST HONEST AND TRUTHFUL, IN ORDER TO ACQUIRE MORE AND MORE LINK

[Anonymous No.8383399]

>>8383379
IF THE DATA PROVIDED BY ORACLES IS ALL OVER THE PLACE—IF ***THINGS SEEM FUCKY***, THEN THE CONTRACT IS NOT EXECUTED

YOU DIDN'T EVEN READ THE WHITEPAPER
YOU
DIDN'T
EVEN
READ
THE
WHITEPAPER
AND YOU'RE TRYING YOUR HAND—AND FAILING—AT BELLIGERENTLY DEBATING A PROGRAMMER WHO HAS
FUCK RIGHT OFF

[Anonymous No.8383437]

>>8383379
>>8383399
TRIGGERED

[Anonymous No.8383513]

>>8383399
just breathe

[Anonymous No.8383552]

>>8381661
Holy fucking shit
This trenchbrain nootropic is so wrong

In the last part he is asking how LINK will deal with forks of other chain and gas prices and al this shit. This fuck has NO idea what LINK is he is out of his mind. T. Hodges wrekd his shit

[Anonymous No.8383585]

>>8380797
That guy is a brainlet, doesn’t know what the fuck he’s talking about.

[Anonymous No.8383595]

>>8380797
It's a simple json parcer

[Anonymous No.8383607]

>>8380938
That guy works for Mobius, doesn’t he

[Anonymous No.8383616]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Chainlink/comments/84u52s/can_someone_answer_this/ FAGGOT

[Anonymous No.8383665]

>>8381661
>>8381709
This is one of you fucking with redditors this person isn't real.

[Anonymous No.8383743]

>>8383665
occam's razor says this person is real
any retardation on reddit is safe to assume to be real

[Anonymous No.8384301]

>>8382875
Will do. Just got paid today. Buying another 700 linkies.

[Anonymous No.8384383]

is he arguing that 1 centralized source of info is more reliable than 20 decentralized sources of info?

[Anonymous No.8384420]

>>8380861
Unironically this

[Anonymous No.8384432]

>>8384383
No he just says instead of 20 oracles copying info from the same api said api could provide the data directly after it has been cryptographically signed. Same point of failure just cheaper and more efficient.

[Anonymous No.8384470]

>>8384432
unironically killed myself when i realized this

[Anonymous No.8384479]

>>8384432
And how would this api go about connecting to a decentralized smart contract?

[Anonymous No.8384558]

Anyone who is already invested and not holding until at least 2020 retarded. I only have 5000 and even I'll make it with that by my standards if it hits even 50, incredibly comfy if we reach $100. Oracles are the next step in smart contracts

[Anonymous No.8384619]

>>8384432
So this is the end...damn I'll still hold my 30k link stack all the way to zero because I'm loyal.

[Anonymous No.8385022]

>>8384619
Why is this the end?

[Anonymous No.8385259]

>>8385022
Read
>>8384432

[Anonymous No.8385620]

>>8385259
Brainlet here, this effectively undermines LINK?

[Anonymous No.8385652]

Same fud about Bitcoin years ago "if you control most of the miners you can just reverse or force transactions lol"

[Anonymous No.8385676]

>>8385620
the opposite. LINK is an excellent project with real world use.

[Anonymous No.8385703]

>>8385676
I knew it...but why did the other anon say that this was the end and he was going to still hold his stack? The anon made it sound like LINK was redundant.

[Anonymous No.8385740]

>>8385703
rly maek u thin

[Anonymous No.8385795]

>>8385703

1. Retard

2. Still trying to accumulate

[Anonymous No.8385921]

>>8384479
ONE computer in the smart contract blockchain asks the api source. If it does not provide the data (within certain timeframe) another computer is up to the task. Any computer on the chain can just ask for the crypto signed apidata and transmites it to the other computers in the chain. All the other computers can verifiy the data since the asymmetrically signed and also includes source site, date and data type. The public key obviously has been saved while creating the smart contract with alternatives if api-source with key x is not available.

This way you do not need a gorilion nodes with a reputation system, expensive infrastructure token and content aggregation which spams the ether network

[Anonymous No.8385956]

>>8385703
I spend my time researching and reading about link all day. It's sad desu.

[Anonymous No.8385960]

>>8385921
Good luck designing a decentralized smart contract platform that does that. Go make your ETH competitor.

[Anonymous No.8385968]

>>8381521
You dumb dumb?

[Anonymous No.8386019]

>LINK is kill because of something a fucking redditor says
fuck reddit and every normie who posts there
LINK is /ourcoin/ and this moon mission is not for normies
it never was

[Anonymous No.8386041]

>>8380797
I READ THE WHOLE FUCKING THING AND I BOUGHT MORE LINK FUCK YOU REDDIT
at first i looked up NIH and was like fuck this guy has a point ima sell but then i read the whole thing.
the fudder doesn't believe that "an entiiire corporation with notable reputation" would ever deceive the public for financial gain. how naive can you be, when the most popular corporation for crypto that most of the public trusts, COINBASE, has been ripping the balls off of people for years?

[Anonymous No.8386112]

>>8385960
This is much easier than chainlink and cheaper. I bet some of he next gen dapp coins /even ether) could easily implement it . In the end it is just stand asymmetric encryption/hashing with the pre selection of api sources you want to trust with your api. Why would vote on which data is correct instead of just securing it by math (how crytpo is supposed to work):

[Anonymous No.8386137]

>>8386112
*trust with your smart contract.

[Anonymous No.8386159]

OBJECTION

[Anonymous No.8386183]

im more worried about the amount of revenue it can generate than the tech at this point. what would they charge to chainlink a smartcontract, less than a dollar? thats a fuckload of usage, 100's of million of smartcontracts per year before its even realistically valued at what it is now

[Anonymous No.8386224]

>>8381082
this is the funniest shit i've read all day

[Anonymous No.8386304]

fucking hell, plebbit is so cringeworthy

[Anonymous No.8386458]

>>8386112
>In the end it is just stand asymmetric encryption/hashing with the pre selection of api sources you want to trust with your api
>t. https://www.reddit.com/r/iamverysmart/

[Anonymous No.8386477]

>>8380797
can't read

[Anonymous No.8386536]

>>8386183
try reading the whitepaper, faggot.

[Anonymous No.8386572]

So from what I understand about the current fud in this thread
>No he just says instead of 20 oracles copying info from the same api said api could provide the data directly after it has been cryptographically signed. Same point of failure just cheaper and more efficient.
Wouldn't every company have to make a new api system that cryptographically sign itself? I'm not a programmer so that may sound retarded, but my understanding of link is that it's a very easy adapter for the current systems to integrate into smart contracts, and a lot of the value comes from the fact that the legacy businesses won't have to change much.

[Anonymous No.8386773]

>>8386572
Somebody please refute this point or I'm going to kms

[Anonymous No.8387064]

>>8386773
You do realize this is part of what they have advisors for? If the problem was that easily solved, the project would've never progressed to this point.

[Anonymous No.8387092]

>>8386773
dude, it's like saying
>why not just have 1 node with intel sgx running
I remember people asking this question in slack months ago, good old times

[Anonymous No.8387211]

>>8387092
How was it refuted?

[Anonymous No.8387327]

>>8380906
nootropicat leave, nobody likes you

[Anonymous No.8387638]

>>8386159
This dude is KILLING them
This isn't some random contrarian retard....he clearly knows his shit

[Anonymous No.8388291]

>>8387211
it's basicly how the jason parser meme was born, simply fetching data, besides that1 node is not reliable enough even if it's honest, you cannot risk any downtime etc, and having a series of nodes or servers waiting in line to make transfer the calls will innevitably lead to a big netowork that work as some quasi oracle.
If it was reliable people would use oraclize for everything but there is a reason they don't

>>8387638
yea I'm sure they will quit the project tomorrow
lol, just because some angry faggot impressed you with basic level questions doesn't mean he made any valid points, he clearly doesn't understand what Chainlink is about.
Looks like he expected CL to ensure everything end to end with a blow job on top.
Chainlink only promises to safely transfer data from A to B, whether A and B trust eachother it's not CL's problem
I know he impressed you because you have low standards after losing all the brain cells here on biz but please, don't choke on his dick

[Anonymous No.8388480]

>>8388291
Thanks man, this was enlightening. Now, WHO THE FUCK MADE ME QUESTION MY LINKIES?! WAS IT MOBIUS PAJEETS?

[Anonymous No.8388634]

>>8388480
yea it's good to be alert, but Sergey/Steve/Ari aren't stupid, and the project has been in the making for years, they wouldn't even attempt it if they weren't sure it's doable.

Also if you ever get doubts look at the amount of projects just in crypto space alone that announced their interest in using CL
>Req
>Zeppelin
>Origami
>AirSwap
>Factom (I believe)
They are not brainlets, they know that centralized solutions simply won't make it
not only are they easily hackable (with no insurance of ourse), but also susceptible to downtime, look at picrel, what a disaster lol

I'm also pretty sure the team will run a shitload of their own nodes to overpower any potential bad actors in the beginning or in the future of the network (that's speculation on my part but I don't see a reason why they wouldn't do it)

That's why a giant like Swift will use CL with their multi million dollar contracts,
oraclize won't guarantee them anything, and in case shit goes down they cannot even be held accountable.

The only ones at risk (only theoretically) of an attack are other node operators, not the contract creator

[Anonymous No.8388688]

All this link hate is bullish af!

[Anonymous No.8388722]

>>8388688
so are these dubs wtf

[Anonymous No.8388725]

>>8388688
this is nothing, just wait when Link really starts taking off, all the late whales will go for the most sofisticated, best coordinated fud crypto community has ever seen about CL to shake out the neets

>>8388722
nice

[Anonymous No.8388751]

>>8380797
Middle of the dialogue page..
>Weather or not the weather will weather down the fud about whether the weather will impact chain link will 1k eoy

Fucking plebbit has had it's fluoride increased. We're going full le autismo now

[Anonymous No.8388867]

>>8388291
>Looks like he expected CL to ensure everything end to end with a blow job on top.
Kek this. People think that Chainlink is some magical shit that will suddenly change the world as we know it and as such will do all the work necessary for all the parties involved in a smart contract.
These questions are nothing that the team didn't already plan for and tested throughout during the design and development of architecture.
It's all about hypotheticals with these faggots, you'd figure someone would've made a better oracle solution by now if the answers are so obvious that a nootropic reddit degenerate is aware of them.

And as you said, why would other projects want to work with them if implementing their own oracles is better and as easy as this guy makes it out to be.

[Anonymous No.8388883]

>>8386159
This guy doesn't know the first thing about Chainlink.
You could obfuscate the data oracles are processing, so nobody (least of all the nodes themselves) would ever know where a certain contract was being handled, by whom, by how many.
This is basic white paper stuff.

[Anonymous No.8389235]

pretty sure i argued this point regarding a centralized data source with a lawyer in here lmao. i mean he was on my side of the argument. very relevant especially with the contractual obligation niggerness this retard from reddit is spewing

[Anonymous No.8389248]

>>8388725
They realize I'll never sell right? Literally the entire project could implode(for some reason I'm not smart enough to imagine) and I'll hold to $0.00 and buy up everything so I can have #1 wallet ranking. I'll also run a node whether it's profitable or not. I'll never abandon my Link and I'll 100% take some Link to my grave.

[Anonymous No.8389274]

>>8389248
that's the spirit!
running a node even when being the last man alive on earth

[Anonymous No.8389331]

This is excellent fud, who is this fucking guy? He only posts in /r/ethereum and chainlink? Why does he know so much about LINK? Has to be a paid fudder

[Anonymous No.8389340]

Honestly, this pretty much undercuts absolutely anything tropicat is saying.

>If one absolutely requires obligation from all parties to hold their end of the deal or be held liable, what advantages would they be looking for by utilizing a smart contract in the first place?

[Anonymous No.8389359]

>>8380875
>mfw reading that
FUCK.. LINK IS THE REAL THING. GOD DAMMIT. THAT WAS SOME GOOD FUD BUT THEY STRUCK IT DOWN AGAIN. AAAA!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.8389434]

>>8389359
the fact that, even with all this FUD and shitty autistic memes surrounding LINK, Sergey is allowed to appear in conferences surrounded by successful non-scammers means that LINK is gonna make it, there's nothing that could kill it

[Anonymous No.8389441]

>>8386773
It basically is the same tech how https made everything secure. Ofc you need some api side changes but this is way better than some overpriced infrastructure token and not hard to do.

[Anonymous No.8389482]

>>8389359
>>8389434

It's like the fact Sergey presented LINK at SIBOS with SWIFT is something people just magically overlook.

[Anonymous No.8389500]

>>8389441
...so LINK is not a meme?

[Anonymous No.8389629]

>>8385259
Yes if there's 1 data source that is a problem , in that case the contract owner may elect to go a different route.

But some thing like bond rates would have hundreds of different apis

[Anonymous No.8389662]

>>8389482
Tons of chink coins have big name partnerships...doesn't make the product less of a scam

[Anonymous No.8389668]

>>8389274
Someone has to get the data

[Anonymous No.8389698]

>>8389662
How dare you compare sergey to some beta Justin sun or whoever the vechain chink is

[Anonymous No.8389748]

>>8381688
Thas a good formula

[Anonymous No.8389761]

>>8389698
Is what I said wrong? Partnerships don't mean anything in crypto

[Anonymous No.8389828]

>>8389761
They don't add credibility to a project?

It's whole another thing entirely when chinks lie about the extent of partnerships and hype things up with their special signing ceremonies.

[Anonymous No.8389866]

>>8389828
XLM is partnered with IBM...means nothing

[Anonymous No.8390837]

LINK tokens aren't necessary for the system to operate. There are enough ERC20 tokens out as it is. There's no reason for business owners to adopt. It's an intrinsically worthless and unnecessary part of the blockchain. How does /biz/ not realize this?

[Anonymous No.8390944]

>>8390837
It's fun to use your imagination. :)

[Anonymous No.8391106]

>>8390944
FUCKIN CHECKED IMAGINATION 1000 EOY

[Anonymous No.8391167]

LINK is dead now, faggots....accept it

[Anonymous No.8391413]

>>8391167
WOAH
never thought about it like that before....

[Anonymous No.8391561]

Alright which one of you keeps fucking around with the 10k link order? Quit dancing around me faggot

[Anonymous No.8391725]

Hey faggots

If you're so sure that this guy's arguments are baby-tier then vornth must be an idiot because he is getting absolutely buttblasted

And this is supposed to be the "technical community manager", are you saying you know more than this guy?

[Anonymous No.8391745]

>>8380797
good

[Anonymous No.8391748]

>>8391725
why do you need validation for your investment? why do you go around with this pathetic maneuver just to be reassured?

[Anonymous No.8391804]

>>8391748
Because I am not a programmer and I rely on technical experts to validate the worthiness of technology investments

If the technical expert (the ChainLink technical community manager) can't even keep up with some fucking nobody on reddit, then that makes the technology questionable

[Anonymous No.8391876]

>>8391804
you said so yourself that you dont know shit yet you determined that the community manager cannot keep up, makes you think. sell your LINK dumbass. i hope no anon spoonfeeds this faggot

[Anonymous No.8391912]

>>8391804
Since you're not into the technical, I'll go e an overview
The inquisitor brought up age-old fud about the value of a decentralized Oracle vs centralized
Chain link tech community manager replied with the age-old responses
Inquisitor effectively said "Kek who the fuck are you?" (Attacking the responder rather than the argument)

His ending argument was that API providers will deploy their own Oracles for blockchain. That is like saying an api provider will open their own data center, just doesn't make sense in 2018.

By all means, sell. The weak hands are finally cracking, maybe we can get some insightful conversation back on this board.

[Anonymous No.8391925]

no company is going to put millions of dollars on the line trusting some "decentralized oracle network" when they can have an actual company add the data to the blockchain with a contract and sue them if they fuck up

[Anonymous No.8391959]

>>8391925

Make this it's own thread. /Biz/ has no rebuttal to this.

[Anonymous No.8391977]

>>8391925
>>8391959
These weak hands are just getting annoying now, please just be silent and sell

[Anonymous No.8392000]

>>8391977

[Anonymous No.8392004]

>>8391977
it's just annoying at this point because there are many obsessed linktards that would gladly answer their concerns but they have to go at it in this roundabout way to clear their anxiety with their investment. even more annoying when it has been discussed again and again

[Anonymous No.8392046]

>>8391925

LOL refuted in the reddit post and elsewhere, a centralized oracle can easily lie about any misrepresentation of data. So obviously we want to use them and be drawn into a legal battle right?

With chainlink the node operators can be penalized for faulty data reporting, with reputation loss in addition to CL collateral. Unreasonble contract demands won't see nodes willing to stake rep or CL on them, likewise high value contracts will be able to enforce stricter controls on how the data is delivered to them.

BUT keep trying to "sue" people you dumb boomer fuck, cause we know how fast that works these days.

[Anonymous No.8392047]

Does that guy not realize that if what he's saying is true ETH is also 100% worthless?

[Anonymous No.8392066]

>>8391876
I can follow through the arguments and counterarguments and at the very least its apparent that this guy is keeping up with vornth

>>8391912
That doesn't seem to be what they are talking about now: https://www.reddit.com/r/Chainlink/comments/84u52s/can_someone_answer_this/dvtrafp/

He's asking how CL will prevent this idea of "reputation farming", how they'll prevent against DDOS attacks and giving an example of how random selection of nodes can still cause issues

[Anonymous No.8392074]

>>8392047

the co-founder of ethereum, has admitted this

[Anonymous No.8392082]

>>8391167
>>8387638
>>8381326
>>8380938
>>8380861
Do people forget /biz/ has post ids or something? If you keep trying to fud in the same thread over and over while acting emotionally invested it's just going to make you seem like a moron. I actually can't tell if you're just an idiot or if you actually own link and are trying to false flag fud.

[Anonymous No.8392105]

>>8392000
Is that from that meme site that also said antshares was shit?

[Anonymous No.8392107]

ALERT !

Sergey is emptying his wallet on Binance

SELL SELL SELL

[Anonymous No.8392118]

>people think this is killing link and not making it stronger by giving the devs things to think about and improve upon its flaws while other oracle providers are still dead in the water

[Anonymous No.8392122]

>>8381924
trouble is some of these anonymous fags are in reality heavy hitters possibly even major competitors hiding behind anonymity to call out or rubbish a competitor

[Anonymous No.8392138]

>>8392118

so the devs can't find the flaws but /biz/ can?

[Anonymous No.8392177]

>>8392138
These "flaws" are all hypothetical situations that everyone involved in this and other similar projects are already aware of which is why it is collectively known as the oracle "problem". ChainLink has been in development for years and to think that this FUD hasn't already been taken into consideration is absurd. Especially since most of the points this reddit retard keeps bringing up is answered already in the whitepaper. Most of his points are just more hypothetical situations that FUD decentralization as a whole.

[Anonymous No.8392213]

more reality

[Anonymous No.8392244]

>>8392213
>go through the trouble of making this chart
>too stupid to put the dollar sign before the number

[Anonymous No.8392387]

>>8392047
i was just thinking of this. he's basically trying to fud decentralization

[Anonymous No.8392482]

>>8392066
UNREFUTED