/biz/ - Business & Finance

DECO is a way for to provide third party proofs about TLS access without releasing the content of the data. While that sounds a bit dense, I think the easiest way to explain why it is useful is in the form of an example.
This would allow, for example, a smart contract to be notified of a bank balance, without needing read access to your bank account. So if your tendie money smart contract is that your mum will send you $10 a week as long as you keep your bank account above $5000, DECO would allow the smart contract to monitor your bank balance, assuring it remains over $5k, without needing full read access to all your banking information, and without needing your bank login information in order to access the TLS data that contains that information. Obviously you (and businesses) would not want to have to provide your private login details to a smart contract, so this is an incredibly useful step towards the development of useful, complex smart contracts.

you're doing God's work anon

so many whos and no use cases

sub 1 eoy

>>15513474
My chase bank application already monitors this for me. Another useless link thing. So many buzz words.

>>15513470
yeah but does it really matter when the price is going back to $1?

>>15513474
>accessing bank balance without credentials
how??

>>15513470
how can a company issue bonds with smart contracts? how can you enforce the interest and maturity payments?

>>15513745
>>15513745
3 way signatures + SMPC + zk proofs. It allows the oracle to participate in a TLS session while being limited only to the information it "needs to know", which in the above case is the relevant bank balance.

>>15513745
More info here with a link to the full paper if you want a technical rundown:
>http://hackingdistributed.com/2019/09/03/DECO/

>>15513793
combine open banking APIs with legally binding smart contracts

>>15513798
>>15513803
cool thanks

>>15513815
i dont see how that solves the problem

my understanding is that to make smart contracts really work, we'd need to basically tokenize everything, if you can tokenize a company's assets, then sure, you can make that work to issue bonds

a smart contract needs to hold the goods to enforce a trade, it can't do that by simply having access to a bank account, correct me if i'm wrong

>>15513803
No thanks. I don't read whitepapers.

t. All-in on Chainlink

>>15513853
Chainlink has always vaunted its capacity to "communicate with legacy systems and trigger payments", but I completely understand where you're coming from.
It's unclear what the interface between Chainlink adaptors and legacy systems actually looks like, and to what degree these APIs can facilitate the movement of non-tokenised assets.
Presumably the opening of banking APIs will allow API access to payment triggers and asset movement systems, but how that interfaces with current bank sovereignty and security is anyone's guess.
You look at the systems in OP and consider how fundamental they would be to a useful "complete" solution, and then consider that they have literally only just been laid as functional frameworks, not even PoCs at this point, and you realise that this process will take years,
The important takeaway, for me, is that Chainlink and IC3 are developing a range of solutions across these diverse problems and are obviously intent on delivering widely useful complex smart contracts with full comprehension of the sort of regulatory and technical challenges that need to be overcome before this happens.

>>15513470
> I'll summarise them into digestible points:
STFU you Pajeet nigger faggot .
It’s going to ZERO you fucking Somali shill
Bitch

>>15513853
>smart bond created by A
>B sends funds to As bank account
>immutable proof exists on chain both of funds sent and funds received
>smart bond is now active
>B receives quarterly coupon payments triggered by off chain clocks
>immutable proof exists of these timestamps and whether A paid interest
>bond matures
>immutable proof exists of whether A paid principal
this of course all assumes that banking APIs are fully opened and zero knowledge (DECO) and oracle (chainlink) tools are lightweight, yet secure enough to provide all this data without sacrificing confidentiality

>>15513949
Just remember I’m going to make your daughter suck my penis after she drops you off at McDonalds in 5 years.

>>15513933

>you realise that this process will take years

it's all very unclear to me now, i work at a quite large corp, and i've discussed the whole blockchain/smart contracts tech with my manager and a few other people, we came into the conclusion that it's still too early to make a move, too many pieces still missing

however, it feels like it's just around the corner, so many startups hushing in this space.

i'm invested in link, and my time line is of at least 3y for us to see real action

>>15513978

>B receives quarterly coupon payments triggered by off chain clocks

so you say that the smart bond would have access to A bank account, and be able to withdraw from it to pay interest to B?

what stops the company to just stop using that account?

my point is that the only way you can know for sure that a smart contract will execute a trade, is if it is holding both side's assets

the same problem happens with derivatives, how can you make a future contract with it? you'd need to tokenize commodities.

I'm not saying that tokenizing commodities is impractical, on the contrary, it would make the market move much, much faster. But how far away from having governments backing up tokenized commodities are we?

>>15513603
It has a person monitoring it for you. This one is hands-free.

>>15513572
this. too many discord trannies/bored zoomers on biz these days

>>15514144
Are you brain dead?

>>15513853
you answered yourself

everything will need to be tokenized to blockchains, any other solution is half assed and wont work to get broad adoption

this is all 10y away from now

>>15514262
What’s the point of holding this peice of shit for another 10 years?

>>15514277
this network is going to be immense, if oracles, or if even half of them, end up using chainlink, the $1k meme will become real.
the tech might move fast, but you have to imagine what will it take to move the whole current system to use tokens for everything.
there is a absurd amount of friction to make this work

>>15514315
I’m just going to sell then jump in later. I’m not keeping my cash tied up.

>>15514315
Isn't this one of the things that is holding LINK down? In order to use so many tokens and trust the network, ethereum will need to be a lot more trustful and have much more capacity than now. There is 90% chance that i'm just being dumb, but it seems that "the talk is good but there's too much uncertainty" is the reason for chainlink to be dumping despite Mixicles

>>15513470
>The processing logic of the smart contract can be shown to third parties without revealing the parties or the inputs/outputs
>processing logic
you mean the code for the smart contract?

>>15514344
>He doesn't understand there will be thousands of legitimate corporate blockchains that will need Chainlink to deliver data in a decentralized manner

>>15514339
dont put money that you are going to need tomorrow in crypto

>>15514344
there is a lot of variables, companies today are still figuring out how does all of this even helps them.
pic related is a answer i got from a guy who is very much well connected in this world

>>15514375
I'm just a poorfag third-worlder trying to make a little money, fren

>>15514365
Specifically the terms of the agreement, the actual "work" that was done within the smart contract, and the identities of the participants of the smart contract.
But this is all flexible and can be adapted to the particular needs of that smart contract.
So a regulator might have access to some of that data but not other parts, depending on what the regulatory requirements and needs of the transacting parties are. The regulator can even have the terms encrypted under their own public key so they can "view" the smart contract as an overseeing party. It even extends to cases where the parties might be anonymous, but the regulator can hold identity data and revoke anonymity in the case of, for example, a law enforcement request.
It's laid out in section 5.5 of the Mixicles pdf if you'd like to read more, but simply put it allows for very flexible smart contracts that can adapt to a wide range of regulatory requirements.

>>15514442
Ok, I'll read it tonight simply because your explanation seems to rely on other factors defined in the paper.

>>15514391
iv said from day one this shit lacks a practical use case

enjoy the slow bleed to sub 1 retards

>>15514393
key word is will, future tense
and by that time, there will be bigger better solutions

stay delusional faggots

Remember when we thought $15+ eoy

>>15514624
It’s still highly possible wtf you talking about

>>15513603

They're deluded beyond help

What matters is who’s implementing it and using it for what.
Chainlink is basically fine for purpose and obfuscation isn’t that important

Gentlemen, this is a fine thread. Good biz is back in town!!

>>15514663
All that matterds is the number of job requesters on mainnet.

Sound fine, where can I buy some and check back in a year once they’re worth something?