/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>15614893
CalTech anon here, can confirm

>>15614893
scammer

I agree. A course in miracles claims that the mind has abilities far beyond what our modern world deems possible” (2012, circle of a, Mackie). There are stories that there are sightings of people using psychic abilities. There are also people who swear that they have seen psychic abilities. However, some might say that those people who swear by it, must be watching too much T.V if they say they have seen it. Psychics could be real or they could be fake and who knows whether they are being realistic about it or not. There are no such things or people like “Sam Winchester”, a star character from the Supernatural series that’s on the television…show more content…
It is a common misconception that people with psychic abilities must be highly evolved individuals. There are no such things like everyone being the same and we are all special individuals and all vary in a different way. Some people like to say that they have a twin somewhere in the world, but they’re never 100 percent the same. “The possession of psychic abilities does not indicate a person’s level of development anymore than the possession of great physical strength does. We all have psychic potential, but our abilities stay dormant until they are activated. Psychic abilities can be learned by anyone who takes the time and effort to learn them, but that time and effort would be better directed towards developing their consciousness” (2012, psychic abilities explained, esoteric science).

>>15614893
>implying you have any idea how actual service contracts are written

>>15614893
You sound smarter than Ari Juels, thanks for the heads up

>>15614893
I think you will find that a backbone of oracles making a bunch of money to make the network work for Enterprise will throw a wrench in your assumptions about people attempting malicious attacks.
Now this is not decentralized Utopia style security but it will work especially if people have a personal preference for specific big dick nodes with a long history of valid data and huge bags tied to them ( linkpool etc )
Look at shit like Nano, no double spends after all this time.

In general though you are a huge faggot that likes when black guys cum in your ass.

ok

>>15614893

>>15614893

>>15614942
>this is not decentralized Utopia style security but it will work
This

Isn't this the pump and dump scam being investigated by the SEC?

>>15614942
>Now this is not decentralized Utopia style security but it will work
True, but over time (long term) it can easily become truly decentralized.

>>15614893
>>15614896
>>15614902
>>15614906
>>15615144
Imagine having a jagged hole where your penis used to be and getting around insisting everyone call you 'madam'.

>>15614893
what linkies do not understand is the entire point of the collateral

i buy info from a node. since the node operator is a stranger, he gives up some collateral in case he fucks up or tries to screw me over.
except that the node operator doesn't have to be a fucking stranger. rather than waste billions on LINK, the smart ones will set up their personal nodes with 0 collateral and the dumber ones will follow. it's trustless and risk free and a superior alternative to what linkies daydream about happening.

>>15614893
you talk like a fag and your shits all retarded

nobody understands you bro keep it simple 100 100 100

>>15615193
Except you don't need any Oracle for that, you can write directly to the blockchain if the agreement exists only between yourself and yourself.
That's not the use case here.

>>15615213
It is the last sad attemp at fud. OP must have a giant bag to put that much energy into coming up with thos shit andctyping it out. I pity him more than the lol MOAB tweet ranjeets

>>15615193
> A single centralized point under the control of a single entity.
I'm sure this level of trust sounds nice until things start going wrong between parties who have no reason to trust each other.

I want to furnish muh contract (any contract) with data so that it executes correctly and no-one messes with the data enroute through MITM man in the middle attacks. I decentralize this point of connectivity to a dedicated network for best results. I specify the number of nodes that fetch data at particular times and for good measure particular sources to achieve some degree of fairness in an immoral world.

Just take a median ffs, it is really robust estimator.

>>15615193
>something happens between a dyad of personal nodes that one of them doesn't want
>pulls the plug on the node
>your entire framework goes up in smoke

>>15614893
This is where OP got that from: https://github.com/ethereumbook/ethereumbook/blob/38643cf987ffbbccf35dc50920b6ad084b8c987c/oracles.asciidoc

That part is talking about aggregation, and at the end Gavin says "Therefore, ChainLink offers a standard set of aggregation contracts, but also allows customized aggregation contracts to be specified.".
Meaning there will be tons of custom solutions, and not just the one proposed by Chainlink.

The entire write-up is one big promotion of decentralized oracles over centralized ones, btw.

>>15617231
OP btfo

>>15615193
You don't need Chainlink to do any of that. You can setup a node and json parse shit from it and your only fees would be related to the hardware you're using. The whole point of Chainlink is DECENTRALIZED oracles.

>>15614942
>this isn’t a decentralized oracle, but it will work
Yeah, you link cultists keep moving the goalposts. Might as well have just stuck with oraclize.

>>15617317
>Might as well have just stuck with oraclize.
That's not what Oraclize is thinking.

>>15617343
fucking lmao

>>15614893
What I don't understand about projects like this is why anyone would think it's feasible for the system to work if the end users have to use the same token that "investors" bought on exchanges. This is obviously a bad way of operation.
Do you guys honestly think that companies will go on binance, wait like an hour for their deposit to go through, then market buy like 0.0087 chainlink (since we're assuming it's going to $1000), and then transfer it, wait for confirmation and THEN do something with it?
>b-but they will just hold heaps at all times so they can use some whenever they need to
Yeah, fucking p&g and mcdonalds will hold millions of something that could lose 5% of its value in a few hours.
Why wouldn't a different service offering a subscription based model come out eventually and BTFO the whole chainlink autism?
>b-but it's not decentralised
No one even cares about that as long as shit works. Visa isn't decentralised but everyone is using it without problems because it does what it's supposed to. The only way ripple or any other scam project could even hope to replace it is if they're cheaper. But then visa can just lower their fees and take the losses for a couple of months until ripple's price plummets and everyone forgets about it, then hike the prices back up.

>>15614893
>non-trivial
i am very smart watch me type smart words

>>15617484
underated comment

>>15617484
You're right, no-one will ever use public blockchains.

>>15617803
>misrepresenting my argument this hard
I never said no one will use public blockchains, I said institutions will not use chainlink (which isn't a blockchain) or any other project that promises to settle transactions and/or create smart contracts between banks or fortune 500 companies or whatever. They're trying to sell a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

>>15617484
>Do you guys honestly think that companies will go on binance, wait like an hour for their deposit to go through, then market buy like 0.0087 chainlink
Oracles eat fiat-to-crypto smart contracts for breakfast.
It's pretty much THE iconic use case for them.

You would've known that if you had spent half the time it took to write that post to do the absolute most basic amount of research.

>>15614942
>Look at shit like Nano, no double spends after all this time.
where can you spend nano?

>>15618055
>fiat to crypto smart contracts
Yeah until you need to settle a $100mil transaction and you immediately hike the price by 10% because you buy up the orderbook.

>>15618096
Exactly.

>>15617803
>no-one will ever use public blockchains
Until they find out that mixicles make private blockchains obsolete.

>>15618096
And thus another Linkie is born.

>>15618154
>>15618104
And this is good how? What two companies would go through the hoops of buying an extremely volatile virtual token on a public marketplace, sending that to the receiving party, and then selling it on a public marketplace to get real money? Do you not realize how ridiculously inefficient this is? Imagine having to worry about the orderbook and whether you can still sell it at roughly the same price you bought it.
Why wouldn't the two companies just pay visa a negligible fee to get shit done instantly at a fixed exchange rate that won't randomly swing 10% in either direction?
Why the fuck would they pay you to do a service for them when they can just pay an established company that will do the same service better. Bonus: CEOs and banks just include visa in their portfolio and now they have a vested interest in the success of visa because they get dividends.

>>15618179
>What two companies would go through the hoops of buying an extremely volatile virtual token on a public marketplace
You have no idea what smart contracts are, do you?

>>15618236
Yeah because if let's say a company wants to pay with usd and the other wants to get paid in jpy, and with the power of wishful thinking and autism the usd and the jpy just get fucking transmuted into each other without an intermediary that actually wants to swap either of them to link at a custom exchange rate

>>15618269
The Link token is not an intermediate step between currency A and currency B.
The Link token is purely there to pay the intermediary between currency A and currency B.

>>15618179
i'm not sure about this but i remember the oracles being able to grab prices.
it is only a few steps away to also using them as swap posts to convert the fee they need from fiat to link
beary nice thread tho keep arguing anon

>>15618377
The absolute iconic use case for oracles is fetching things like fiat prices and putting them on the blockchain.
When you can do that, fiat becomes programmable just like coins and tokens.
You can convert fiat to crypto and back just like you can trade ETH tokens on decentralized exchanges.

This means that mainstream clients using Link nodes will simply pay the fee in fiat, and the node receives Link (which he can then also automatically convert to fiat).
The client likely will never know he paid someone in Link.

This means almost certainly that nearly every mainstream financial smart contract will require additional oracles just to do the fiat-Link conversion.

This is just one example of what's called "network effect"; nodes working for nodes working for clients.
Other examples of these deeper-level oracle services are mixicles, threshold signatures, reputation contracts, aggregation contracts, etc etc etc

>>15618281
Okay, then where does that amount of link token come from? Surely one of the parties has to pay it, and if they have to pay it they first have to buy it. If the fee is a negligible amount then there's really no reason for the token price to be high, and if it is then dealing with it will still be a pain in the ass.
Furthermore I still can't see why fortune 500 companies and banks would use a crypto token to get real world data from oracles or swap currencies, when they already have accounts payable/receivable and forex markets. They don't need things to be any more decentralised because their current systems are already efficient. A manufacturer for example doesn't need to rely on data from decentralised oracles to prove they delivered a shipment to a client, because the shipping company already has their own internal systems and it's a third party that has no reason to lie. Toll isn't going to scam Walmart by lying and saying that they shipped 20 tons of coca cola to them while they actually just kept all the coca cola to themselves. This shit doesn't happen.
Maybe it will be useful for some kind of decentralised marketplace, although postal services and sign on delivery is already sufficient. But this idea that billion dollar companies will all use it to settle conditional transactions that they can already settle through traditional financial institutions sounds completely unreasonable. Like I said, the only reason anyone would switch would be cost and I'm sceptical that chainlink could be cheaper than the closed systems of financial institutions which are basically just excel sheets displaying imaginary numbers.

TEEs? More like REES!

>>15614893
test

>>15618493
>Toll isn't going to scam Walmart by lying and saying that they shipped 20 tons of coca cola to them while they actually just kept all the coca cola to themselves
You clearly have never worked in retail or logistics. Warehouses and retailers don't pay delivery controllers for the fun of it, and they are fucking expensive and it costs ass load of time to have a handful of employees count fucking crates and bottles to make sure the delivery has not been fucked with and is what was paid for

>>15618493
I actually like this approach, you can tell it's a bored faggot...not a paid poo.

It's almost reverse fud trying to make the braindead redditnigger newfags think for themselves for once.

>>15618493
pro tip: everything you said is true and linkies are deluded braindead morons. This is not even a joke and I'm not saying this "ironically". I agree with you 100%. You are right and they are wrong, and for this reason you will not leave this thread satisfied and you will not have your concerns addressed. They instead will get financially BTFO by Sergey for this hubris and delusion.

>>15618545
How is an oracle going to be cheaper? Someone still has to count the boxes for the oracle to get and verify the data.
>inb4 muh automation
Then your company could just automate the process themselves.
>>15618548
I hope that deep down you realise "fud" has always been a joke and the only shills on this site are poos who try to sell you turtlecoin and random yobit shitcoins. You can't seriously think that spamming memes on /biz/ would impact the price of something with a half billion usd marketcap.

>>15618545
this
the point here is time. i recently read about ships being able to just check in the port, load up fuel and leave thanks to blockchain tech. usually, before using this approach they had to stay at these checkpoints for weeks.

>>15618588
Source on this?

I'll enjoy seeing this overpumped manipulated coin dropping into oblivion again. Guess where Link heads if BTC drops again. 50c

>>15617231
Too bad Chainlink is centralized and hasn't even started working on making it decentralized.

>>15618602
https://www.coindesk.com/ibm-maersk-shipping-blockchain-gains-steam-with-15-carriers-now-on-board

>>15618573
>automation
Compared to ten years ago, it is partly automated. Where a decade ago you had some spics count every single bottle, compare the paper delivery form and the order form and tick the boxes, and feed it manually into a database, today it is done with scanners "automatically" feeding the data into an sql database. The issue is you still need the spics to handle the scanner and feed the data into the database, which automatically checks if the order and the delivery, and in the case it doesn't fit you need another employee to call the delivery service and tell them that the order is wrong.

With oracles and smart contracts you can fore and foremost automate the comparison between the sender and receiver database and in case of problems have a smart contract that automatically pays out an insurance or triggers a new delivery.

>>15618493
>if they have to pay it they first have to buy it.
With a smart contract, it's likely they'll never realize they "bought it".
The client for instance will send the node the fee in USD, and the node operator will then receive the appropriate amount of Link thanks to the USD-to-Link smart contract.

This is the absolute basics of smart contracts.
Stop typing all this shit and go do the absolute minimum amount of research.

>If the fee is a negligible amount then there's really no reason for the token price to be high
Simply paying nodes is only a small part of it.
There are only 1 billion Link tokens, of which only a fraction will actually be used in the network, and only a fraction of those for staking.
When the Chainlink network is being used for trillion-dollar industries like insurance, derivatives, bonds, etc. many billions (if not trillions) of USD worth will have to be "staked" in order to ensure node reliability.
This means the Link token will have to be worth many USD to cover that.

Plus there's speculation.

>Furthermore I still can't see why fortune 500 companies and banks would use a crypto token to get real world data from oracles or swap currencies, when they already have accounts payable/receivable and forex markets.
Well Google Cloud, Swift, Capgemini, Gartner, WEF, ... do see why.
So yeah.

Considering your ignorance of smart contract basics, you don't see why because you simply don't understand.

>>15618553
>You are right and they are wrong
You're saying this to a guy who thought you had to convert fiat to Link before you could convert it to another crypto, fucking lmao.

>>15618625
Chainlink was decentralized the second mainnet went live with three nodes.

>>15618573
In the case of shipment delivery, this would require advance RFID chips or some other novel way of counting.
But the point here is that neither the sender nor the recipient has to trust the other; an independent system verifies delivery, and an independent system then handles payment.

>>15617484

No they will pay in cash and it will be converted to crypto automatically without them being the wiser.

>>15618868
I can only imagine linkies' horror when they realize that converting fiat to link via smartcontract is not gonna happen ever. If this piece of the puzzle is not in place, everything else falls apart. People can't even cash out fiat from exchanges into their bank accounts and you faggots think we're gonna have crypto to fiat smart contracts. How deluded and thirsty for hopium do you have to be to believe that?

>>15618917
>converting fiat to link via smartcontract is not gonna happen ever
Damn, thanks for letting us know anon!

I'm a developer and I looked over the Chainlink white paper and documentation, as well as the blog post by Google. Here's a few reasons I would not use Chainlink for my own apps:

The current "mainnet" is not decentralized. there's no way to decentrally assess if an oracle is any good or not.

It took them 2 years to basically build centralized oracles, which is extremely unimpressive (and already exists). I do not have much hope for the future or the competency of their engineers.

The white paper doesn't coherently describe how they plan on making their centralized design decentralized one day. They broadly go over their "decentralized" reputation strategies as if creating sybil resistant decentralized reputation is something of an afterthought, when it's actually an unsolved computer science problem. They've had 2-3 years and 30mil in funding to actually publish technical specifications for this and instead they decided to build trivial centralized oracles. Extremely worrying. It kind of reminds me of IOTA "we'll remove the coordinator later". No you won't. You don't know how.

News outlet and journalists keep reporting on "partnerships" with Google and Swift. But if you actually read the source for the "partnership", it's just a blog post by Google Cloud that promotes their own service (BigQuery) and shows an example about how Chainlink users can use Google Cloud if they want. In no way is Google partnered or planning on using Chainlink themselves. The Chainlink codebase is extremely trivial to rebuild if Google wanted to get into the blockchain oracle space.

Developers wont adopt it as their source for decentralized oracles. That certainly won't happen.
>The ChainLink team went through $50M in 2 years and have nothing to show.

If ChainLink were listed on the stock exchange it would be 6c max. BioTech companies and tech stocks with ACTUAL working projects and approved patents are worth only 30M.

>>15618873
learn some programming. chainlink is not sybil resistant. they need 1 central point of failure to KYC, otherwise anyone can make 10000 fake nodes pretending to be different people.

It is centralized. That is a fact.

Also kek at you being so low IQ. You didn't think you knew how to assess software projects without being a programmer did you? Absolutely BTFO. These are the type of simpletons "investing" (more like donating) in Sergey.

>>15618943
>they need 1 central point of failure to KYC
KYC is optional, and there will be many KYC providers.

>It is centralized. That is a fact.
KYC and sybil resistance have nothing to do with being decentralized or not.

>>15618943
it's the same fucking guy kek. this dude is on an absolute bender

>>15618943
>based

OHHHHHHHH LINKIEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS


AHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHA

>>15618943
>>15618600

>>15618954
absolutely false. learn some programming. KYC is centralized. And decentralization CANNOT exist without sybil resistance. This is a fact that literally any programmer knows.

Again, you are a low IQ, smug, non-programmer. I was correct that no one would use the mainnet when it launched, and I've been proven correct.

In 12 months, no one will still be using it, and I will be proven even more correct.

You're a non programmer investing in software projects. You're like an ape playing chess. You do not understand what you are doing/saying.

Oh and also, since I've made that prediction, the price has dropped 70%. Again BTFO.

>>15619049
>KYC is centralized.
Same is true for private blockchains like Hyperledger Fabric.
But it's still decentralized.

And this is just the initial release of mainnet.
KYC will be optional, and there will be many different KYC providers, just like there will be many providers of solutions for reputation, aggregation, mixicles, etc.
Pretty much every single part of Chainlink is modular.

Also; nice spacing, programmer.

>>15619072

Stop coping and sell. You were BTFO almost 4 times now. Just give up

>>15614893
Who are you even talking to at this point?

>>15619104
(you)

>>15619095
Seething

>>15619095
>>15619149
STOP THIS TRANNY SPEAK YOU FUCKING FAGGOTS. Recreating literal discord terms on 4chan, you both should be ashamed of yourself

>>15619161
stfu

>>15619177
Will you tell me to have sex and dilate next?
Come on say the shill lines

>>15614893
>not feasible
It is called infeasible, thank me later.