/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>17306961
>why the actual fuck would anyone spend time and money switching systems if there is no demonstration of a good/great/profitable reason to do so?

Smart contracts automate 60-90% (industry dependant) of human labor/cost. Derivatives is on the upper bounds, and at a very high per person salary.

SCs also cut the transaction times from 7-14 business days down to seconds, and cut the significant carrying costs/financing costs to float those outstanding contracts for the week(s) it takes to process through the 10+ people making 6 figures each on each side of the trade.

Contracts vary wildly, so there's no one answer...but even basic swaps cost 5k and up in fees alone, and have to go through a centralized clearinghouse. More complex contracts are 25k+, not factoring lawyers and human costs...both types costs a few hundred to a few thousand in financing (10mm+ for a week or more).

SCs can reduce costs from 5k, 25k, 50+k after labor down to 10 cents to deploy and whatever their selection chainlink node operators charge for data. Basically a node could charge these guys 500 bucks for a couple minutes of "work" (2-3 price feed deliveries and a few million in collateral) and banks/trading firms would be lining up asking whos dick they have to suck for that cheap of a price.

>>16735921
Their github is a bunch of non functional demo code that sill cites xrp (rofl).

Sure, they can send outbound payment messages in a centralized manner with a single failure point and no consensus/completion verification. Almost anything/anyone can, that's the idea of gpi being an iso protocol.

How are they (and everyone else) getting secure input data? Up to and including processed transaction verification?

I refer back to CL literally being the only legally recognized and/or required solution. Faggot.