/biz/ - Business & Finance

retarded. This would only be an issue if their was a monopoly on nods

literally
unironically
who

>>17732327
That’s the point of decentralized oracles. A bad actor like that would get punished. You would need all oracles to collude to publish bad results

>>17732397

>You would need all oracles to collude to publish bad results

Which is the whole point of that post. In extreme conditions it would be beneficial for all of the oracles to collude because the potential profit would be much higher than any penalties they might get.

Stinkies shrekked.

>>17732576
Getting ant share vibes from this pic..

>>17732479

am brainlet. Please explain.

So if they were all longing link, they could report it higher than thought to avoid liquidation?

>>17732327
If only someone could come up with a solution to this problem with oracles, or "oracle problem" if you will. Perhaps, rather than relying on an oracle which can be controlled in such a manner, a "centralised" manner so to speak, instead you could have access to some sort of oracle network. The Oracle network could be made decentralised and trustless, with consensus being rewarded somehow, and bad actors perhaps being penalised. Imagine - you could pick which ones you used, how much you were prepared to pay for accuracy of data, how frequently you requested it. There wouldn't be a breaker switch that you could throw to turn it off or anything.

Idk though, this sounds like pipe dream at the moment as I can't think of any team making such a thing.

>>17732479
Which would be a problem if you had a centralized oracle, which is the whole point of integrating chainlink in the first place. Are you trolling or just plain retarded?

>>17732479
do you understand game theory

>>17732397
The oracles get paid on the accuracy of the data, not the value of the asset being reported. They are invented/penalized based on accuracy....

Think of a sports reporter, who gets paid to report on the outcome of a game. Theoretically he could have bet on the game and could try to “report” an incorrect score, but that would rely on the bookie using the reporters results and not someone else’s. The more feeds the bookie uses, the harder it would be for collusion, as you are asking everyone reporting to risk their long term income/profession for the short term reward of defrauding a single bet/contract.

OP is making the assumption the oracles are paid based on the asset value rather than the accuracy of the reported value

>>17732479

The job of an oracle is to supply accurate data. The oracle must therefore only be incentivised to provide accurate data, not by any other condition. If it supplied bad data, or stopped supplying data at all then for every mistake or second stopped it will not be making money.

There is only a problem if the oracle is controlled by the product that it supplies data to. In that case then the 'operators' of the smart contract are incentivised by both the good operation of the oracle and also the outcome of their smart contract. In extreme conditions the output of the oracle, though true, would result in the outcome of the smart contract being so negative then it results in a net loss for their combined work. The smart contract operator is therefore incentivised to manipulate their oracle, or switch it off, until the net result returns positive. This is the problem with centralised Oracles in defi.

A decentralised, trustless oracle network would not suffer from this. The oracle network will only be incentivised by it's provision of good data. It is completely independent of the net result of the defi system, and cannot be manipulated by its defi 'customer' for the good of the customer. It is blind to anything but acting for its own good.

>>17732327
What does De mean in DeFi lmao

>>17732479
With the Arbitrum protocol integration, you just need one honest node.

>>17734291
Decentralized

>>17732327
aequitas block order fairness

>>17732479
Jesus christ take this dead stale fud back to 2017 lmao