/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>18904499
https://youtu.be/XYDMmZqv9wI

fucking mickey mouse

peak normie shitcoins partnering with each other

>>18904554
WTF this is literally me

https://youtu.be/BF0qIy4ZnSU?t=7

>>18904499

>Shitcoin partnering with a shitcoin

Nobody gives a fuck about your shitstink.

Such a lust for oracles....... WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>>18904499
all joking aside this is actually very needed in crypto space rn

we need the security of a bank for not needing to worry about losing private keys, but in a decentralized way that ensures they don't exploit holding the keys

>>18904499
who

>>18904499

I see LINK has a Vechain-tier business model now: just selling tokens to idiots based on meaningless partnerships.

>decentralized identity solution
MY IDENAS NOOOOO

>>18904499
another instance of
>let's use stink as a marketing method
two best instances:
- MOAB - ponzi scheme based on then-popular deflationary mechanics
- Enigma - the most brazen of them all, they used link for an exit pump before publicizing their SEC settlement

>>18905137
>another instance of
>>let's use stink as a marketing method
>two best instances: MOAB and Enigma

Yeah, and Google Cloud and Oracle too.
Shameless.

>>18905169
that was insider trading by employees of said companies, possibly bribes. Wasn't that Brazilian (?) guy fired from Oracle after his link shenanigans? It's not like the company would report it anywhere, too much reputational risk.

>>18905212
>that was insider trading by employees of said companies, possibly bribes
Sure it was anon, sure it was.

>Wasn't that Brazilian (?) guy fired from Oracle after his link shenanigans?
No, he got a leading position at Oracle itself.
And he has nothing to do with Oracle integrating Chainlink. His thing was getting startups to integrate chainlink.

>>18904580
from:
>Literally WHO partnership
to now:
PEAK NORMIE SHITCOINS PARTNERSHIP

>>18905247
>Sure it was anon, sure it was.
Explain why there's exactly zero use of link from both google and oracle. It's almost a year from the google post. I remember 'breadcrumbs' about oracle. Literally nothing came true.
You're delusional if you don't realize what actually happened.

>>18905212
>>18905306
Cooooooooooope.

>>18904554
lmao

>>18905306
>Explain why there's exactly zero use of link from both google and oracle
Google Cloud is was about using Bigquery data; so far Chainlink has only done price feeds.
And Oracle was slated to integrate Link in Q3 of this year (probably getting bumped up due to the 'rona).

>>18905365
>Google Cloud is was about using Bigquery data; so far Chainlink has only done price feeds.
cope. It was an organized scam. Who do you think paid for the coindesk article about 'google partnership'?
>And Oracle was slated to integrate Link in Q3 of this year (probably getting bumped up due to the 'rona).
you can't seriously believe that

>>18905333
Checked

>>18905427
>Google Cloud and Oracle are lying
>trust me, an anonymous poster on 4channel

>>18905460
I had these conversations with vechain victims in 2019.
Exact same scam, just with chinese characteristics.
See you in 2021 with link below $0.5

>>18904554

>>18905495
Chainlink:
>massive partners (Google, Oracle, ...) announce Chainlink integration first

Vechain:
>pic related

Yeah, totally the same thing.

>>18905553
>>massive partners (Google, Oracle, ...) announce Chainlink integration first
it has zero partners. The google article was how chainlink can connect to google api, which is true for everything. There's no relationship between google and chainlink.
It's literally the same thing vechain did with bmw. Except chainlink was smart enough to pay someone at google to write a blog post and to pay coindesk to write a lie about partnerships, while being very careful to not write anything about 'partnership' themselves
>Here's how @GCPcloud users can use Chainlink to connect to BigQuery, one of Google's most popular cloud services.

>>18905667
>Google Cloud: mention Chainlink first
>Vechain: hype BMW first

Yeah, "literally the same thing". Uh-huh.

>>18905169
The guy who posted about Chainlink got fired from Google, now he's an advisor for some shitcoin in London.
Coincidence?

>>18905764
>The guy who posted about Chainlink got fired from Google
lmao source pls

>>18905667
Based on numeralogical beliefs of the satanists in charge of google, it makes sense to me that chainlink is a big deal to them, this has 666 written all over it and the very name it represents is chains, perhaps evocative of ensaving the public in them.

Over all though its unclear if this is the kind of contract to become a devil and hold the chains, or if buying into it is meant to destroy and control those who are invested.

Either way chainlink is not a meme unless google blows the lid off their own game. whether its any use for investing is harder to know.

>>18904554
kek'd harder than I should've.

>>18905714
It's almost a year and there's nothing from google. Deal with it.
>>18905764
really? well that confirms it, 100% bribe.
Theoretically illegal but those things are never reported due to reputational risk. Kind of weird he still has to work, he sold himself low

>>18904554
fpbp

>>18905837
>It's almost a year and there's nothing from google. Deal with it.
Nobody said there would be anything within the year.
Chainlink is still limited to defi price feeds for now.

>really?
No, not really.

>>18905256
except chainlink literally is partnered with WHO

If you're a tranny and you know it clap your hands
If you're a tranny and you know it clap your hands
If you're a tranny and you know it and you really want to show it
If you're a tranny and you know it clap your hands

Daily reminder that you discord tranny freaks will never be women and you're all abominations. You will never fit in. You will never be happy. Kill yourselves ASAP and stop spreading your misery and desperation to this board. Two and a half (2.5) years.

Those scammers still have an almost one-year meaningless old tweet pinned, to ensure it's the first thing anyone sees.

VeChain was a step above though, they just straight paid the Chairman of PwC China
https://www.pwchk.com/en/press-room/press-releases/pr-040518.html
of course literally nothing came out of it
Iota did it with German managers

everyone dumb enough to believe these tricks is going to hold their chosen scam until zero

>>18906019
>an almost one-year meaningless old tweet
Google Cloud actually reposted the Chainlink thing a couple of times, so it's really only "a few months old tweet".
Really shows how meaningless they think it is.

>NOOO it can't be a scam
>are you saying you're smarter than VOLKSWAGEN?
>that's a big corporation which means it's a arbiter of truth
>it's impossible to bribe a manager to pump a shitcoin

>look at that trustworthy face
>employees in a company would never exploit their position to make untraceable millions by pumping shitcoins
>nooo
>things like that only happen in movies

>>18906093
Volkswagen barely said anything about this.
IOTA is simply part of a car industry blockchain initiative.

>>18906170
That's him in an individual capacity.

Literally

W

H

O

All these daily who's do fuck all for the price. Kochis will never be able to buy himself a vinyard if he doesn't start targeting real institutions instead of wasting his time with this bullshit, tik tok dan

>>18906262
>Volkswagen barely said anything about this.
wrong, they promoted iota at a conference
https://youtu.be/ERHhWflCvJQ?t=29
>That's him in an individual capacity.
no, fujitsu promoted it a conference - almost certainly ordered by him
https://www.rttnews.com/2884159/fujitsu-to-demonstrate-next-gen-blockchain-iota-at-hannover-messe-trade-fair.aspx

iota somehow got connections into the 'industry executives' circle in Germany and exploited it to death. There was some beyond absurd video from Bochs with machines in a factory (same factory) communicating over a tangle - why not directly? Because it was a scam to pump iota.

My point is, both vechain and chainlink did the same thing, only details differ. There's nothing dumber than trusting employees in a corporation. Corporations are like ultra-corrupt governments, just without the shooting squads.

>>18906400
>My point is, both vechain and chainlink did the same thing, only details differ.
Yeah, that detail being that Chainlink does not hype anything or even announce anything.

>>18904662
No thanks

stop talking about IOTA niggers that thing is finished.
this is a LINK thread

>>18905427
some of the lowest IQ fud yet.

>>18905365
It won’t get bumped , dev work can be done from home.

>>18904554
Is this real? How does he know how to do that?

>>18905792
Why don't yoh google his name yourself and see that he's just fudding?

>>18906400
Also, Iota was firmly a top 10 coin for the longest time thanks to those "partnerships". The reason it dropped was because (to this day) they haven't even managed to put out an absolute basic working product as promised.
Chainlink put out a usable mainnet a year ago, and its active user base, node network, and partnerships keep ramping up every single day. And it hasn't reached the top 10 yet, ever.

>>18906628
Let's hope so.

>>18906798
I did, I just love watching them squirm.

>>18906882
Chainlink promised a decentralized oracle network. They delivered a network of kyced nodes, absolutely worthless.
If it was a company selling shares they would get prosecuted for securities fraud.

>>18906904
>Chainlink promised a decentralized oracle network.
And that's exactly what they released.
Chainlink mainnet started off with three independent nodes each querying a different API source for the same price: ETH/USD.

>>18906933
The nodes aren't independent, everything is under centralized control. Chainlink can add and remove nodes as they wish, and they can even modify feed parameters, which they fucked up once with synthetix, by replacing xag with xau. They paid the loss out of development funds - which means link holders paid for their fuckup.
Anything using chainlink feeds has to trust them completely.

>>18906981
>everything is under centralized control
Being KYC'ed does not mean they're under control you moron. Fucking lmao.

>>18907009
they can add and remove nodes. how is that not centralized control? they (chainlink) have the ability to put whatever data they want as any feed.

>>18907036
Chainlink does not control the node just because they vetted the node operator.
The fuck is this idiocy.

>>18904554
litereally whoooooo

>>18907075
how do you know they don't control the node? because they tell you that and you trust them.

https://crypto-markets.news/news/chainlink-mykey/477

>>18907093
>how do you know they don't control the node?
Because we know exactly who does.

>>18907075
The FUD has gotten progressively weaker and weaker

>>18907111
no you don't, it's literally impossible. Chainlink can put whatever they want in the node description. They can ever hire people to pretend they are independent. That's what full centralization means.

>>18907162
>no you don't, it's literally impossible
Buddy, the names of the parties running each node are LITERALLY stated next to the node.
They are all projects with transparent online presence and human faces attached to them.

>>18907099
nice blog post faggot

>>18907186
>Buddy, the names of the parties running each node are LITERALLY stated next to the node.
Sergey can easily put 'Donald Trump' there.
>They are all projects with transparent online presence and human faces attached to them.
Chainlink can easily afford to pay some stooges.
There's literally no way to verify this. That's what centralization means. Full trust, not possible to verify anything.

>>18907233
>There's literally no way to verify that they're not paid stooges
That's true for literally everyone on the planet lmao.

>>18907280
no it's not, because I can join decentralized systems and I know I'm not paid. Every user can do the same.
That's what trustless means - anyone can take part and verify everything directly.

>>18907233
Hahahaha just what level of cope is this incoherent mess?

>>18907186
>They are all projects with transparent online presence and human faces attached to them

Just like the US Federal Reserve. Are you trying to sell this as if it's a positive? At least established centralized monetary systems are held to much stricter regulation than this garbage.

This may be the most brain dead thread I've seen on biz in years. These people fudding are a joke and likely link holding trollls unless they really just are this dumb. And the people fighting them are just as brain dead seeing as how shit tier the fud is. Everyone kys and all in link if you want to make it. Couldnt be more obvious

>>18907311
>because I can join decentralized systems and I know I'm not paid
You can apply to be a node operator right now.
Anonymous nodes are also an integral part of Chainlink's design, but that requires more development time (staking etc.)

But none of this has anything to do with the fact that Chainlink does not run the node just because they vetted the node operator.

>>18907390
>Just like the US Federal Reserve.
Chainlink's mainnet has a multitude of independent parties.

>>18907425
>but that requires more development time (staking etc.)
Chainlink is almost 3 years old. It took way less time for ethereum to be created from scratch while collecting less funds - ethereum raised $18M.
Chainlink was never meant to be decentralized, they just put the term for marketing.
>But none of this has anything to do with the fact that Chainlink does not run the node just because they vetted the node operator.
Again, there's no way to verify that at all. You trust them that the operator is a separate entity.

>>18907574
>It took way less time for ethereum to be created from scratch while collecting less funds
ETH is entirely based in determinism.
Chainlink is trying to bridge the world of non-determinism with that, which is obviously a lot more daunting.

>Chainlink was never meant to be decentralized
Yet its mainnet was decentralized from the start.

>there's no way to verify that at all
Except we know the names and identities of all the node operators.

>>18907641
>Chainlink is trying to bridge the world of non-determinism with that, which is obviously a lot more daunting.
If ethereum was build like that, they would start with running a sql database on a trusted server while they sloowly develop the real thing.
>Yet its mainnet was decentralized from the start.
What does it even mean in the context of kyced nodes.
>Except we know the names and identities of all the node operators.
Unless you saw them on video repeatedly, or met them in person, you don't even know if they are real people.
But even if you did, that only means you know they exist, not that they are independent. The only way to know that is to be a node operator. Which means unless everyone can become a node operator (no manual process at chainlink) the network is centralized.

>>18907749
>If ethereum was build like that, they would start with running a sql database on a trusted server while they sloowly develop the real thing.
lmao, clearly you have no idea what "determinism" means in terms of blockchain.

>What does it even mean in the context of kyced nodes.
It means there were multiple (three) independent nodes providing the same basic data point: ETH/USD price.

>Unless you saw them on video repeatedly, or met them in person, you don't even know if they are real people.
Haha ok.

>>18907806
>clearly you have no idea what "determinism" means in terms of blockchain.
your idea that oracles on ethereum are somehow more 'daunting' than ethereum itself shows you have zero coding experience. It's not even comparable, entire chainlink as of now could be made in a month by two people.
>It means there were multiple (three)
>independent nodes
Prove it in a way that doesn't require trust.

>>18907866
>your idea that oracles on ethereum are somehow more 'daunting' than ethereum itself shows you have zero coding experience.
No it doesn't.
Making different parties agree on a predetermined outcome is much more straightforward than making them agree on an unforeseeable outcome.
It's basic logic.

>Prove it in a way that doesn't require trust
We know the identities of those three nodes.

>>18907866
>Prove it in a way that doesn't require trust.
Lol, prove that any random three ETH nodes aren’t run by the same dude.

>>18904554
Uh, that's a man

>>18907958
>Making different parties agree on a predetermined outcome is much more straightforward than making them agree on an unforeseeable outcome.
the real answer is that there's no such thing as 'decentralized oracles' because truth itself is not objective. There's no 'stock price' there's 'price as executed by X' where X is a centralized entity. The only possible solution is to trust signed data from that entity, like coinbase signed api. If it's a decentralized network (other blockchain), then it can be verified in a smart contract.
The whole concept of chainlink is a scam.
Adding kyc was them admitting it's a scam.
>Lol, prove that any random three ETH nodes aren’t run by the same dude.
Three random nodes don't matter, because in ethereum everyone can verify the system. That includes you. It's possible every other node is run by one other person and that wouldn't matter.

>>18904554
Fwarkkkkkkkkkk

>>18905333
Checked

>>18908132
>the real answer is that there's no such thing as 'decentralized oracles' because truth itself is not objective.
There's zero causality.
You meant to say "there's no such thing as truth because truth itself is not objective".
Truth being objective or not has no bearing on the existence of independent oracles.

>There's no 'stock price' there's 'price as executed by X' where X is a centralized entity.
Your point?

>Adding kyc was them admitting it's a scam.
Adding KYC in the beginning allows us to know the nodes are indeed independent.
The more nodes enter the network, the more anonymous nodes will become viable.

>in ethereum everyone can verify the system. That includes you.
That's because it's deterministic. The same action should yield the same result, allowing you to verify another node's work.
The same is not true for oracles, which operate in the non-deterministic world.
This is what makes Chainlink so much more difficult to make than ETH.

>>18904554

My dearest friend, 'tis with immense pleasure that I inform you that your letter has found safe travel to my destination and landed in my hands. However, this pleasure was fated to remain short lived and bittersweet, for I must also admit to you, regardless of what distress it may cause to you, knowing you went to great trouble to pen it and deliver it to me, that I in fact declined to open it and refused to read the message contained within. Surmising your intentions, there exists no doubt in my heart regarding your sincere worries for my financial well being, but alas your attempts to convince me to modify my investment strategies shall regretfully remain futile, as my stubbornness in this matter has indeed been sealed irrevocably and no other voice shall rock its imperturbable foundations. Allow me then to reiterate my will once more, and do your best to forever remember it for no change will follow: I shan't part ways with my beloved asset for it is my utmost belief that I have invested wisely and foresee infinite potential in its future, and therefore no other possession in this world shall change my decision, not even a mountain of gold! For my possessed asset is indeed fated to be worth more than any other riches in the world. We shan't speak of this no more. Sincerely yours, your beloved friend.

>>18904554
>the /biz/ animal

>>18908313
>Truth being objective or not has no bearing on the existence of independent oracles.
Oracles (as independent entities) have no reason to exist if the original source of data has to be trusted anyway, as that means it can be used directly. They only add another layer of trust.
Until every data provider starts signing data, the best temporary solution is indeed a temporary oracle service. The problem with chainlink is that it promised a decentralized oracle, which makes it a scam.
>This is what makes Chainlink so much more difficult to make than ETH.
In the same way 'free energy machine' is difficult to make. It's not possible. That's why they just made a centralized oracle service, along with a completely useless token.

>>18908407
based long-form letter writer

>>18908442
>Oracles (as independent entities) have no reason to exist if the original source of data has to be trusted anyway
>In the same way 'free energy machine' is difficult to make. It's not possible.
The entire world as we know it today operates using the same sources of data. This is what you're fudding.
lmao

>Until every data provider starts signing data, the best temporary solution is indeed a temporary oracle service.
Data providers signing data only means the end user (downstream from the oracle) can verify on-chain what data source was used.
This benefits Chainlink greatly.

>>18908500
>The entire world as we know it today operates using the same sources of data
what do you mean by 'same'? There's really no 'temperature' but 'temperature at sensor x'. So if the sensor can sign its data there's no reason for any additional oracle to exist.
>This benefits Chainlink greatly.
Wrong, it makes it completely pointless. Anyone can put signed data on-chain, it doesn't matter who they are. It can be centralized or decentralized, whatever. The trust issue during data transport is gone.

>>18908559
>what do you mean by 'same'?
All of them. All APIs for instance.
All financial and other transactions over the internet are using the same sources Chainlink would be using.
This is what you're trying to fud.

>Wrong, it makes it completely pointless.
>Anyone can put signed data on-chain, it doesn't matter who they are
Data providers signing data only means the end user (downstream from the oracle) can verify on-chain what data source was used by the Chainlink oracle.
This makes using Chainlink that much more secure.

>>18908855
>This is what you're trying to fud.
Not these sources, but the claim that chainlink nodes are decentralized. They don't reduce trust, they add another trust layer on top of data sources.
>This makes using Chainlink that much more secure.
No, again, it makes it obsolete. There's zero reason to use a chainlink oracle with a signed source and there are reason not to use it. One reason are fees, another is censorship - the node can't fake data but it can refuse to provide it. It's much safer to allow anyone to provide the signed response to the smart contract, making censorship impossible.

>>18908938
>Not these sources
You literally said "if the original source of data has to be trusted anyway".
Chainlink is just another way to use the same sources that the entire world trusts.
This is what you're fudding.

>it makes it obsolete
All it means is that the end user (downstream from the oracle) can verify on-chain what data source was used by the Chainlink oracle.
You still need oracles to feed the data to the contracts.

>>18909386
>Chainlink is just another way to use the same sources that the entire world trusts.
so you agree it's just a centralized oracle service? ok
>You still need oracles to feed the data to the contracts.
I need a python script that downloads data from a signed api. You can call that an oracle, but in any case I don't need chainlink or anything similar.

>>18908559
>the sensor can sign its data
WOW! Great insight! So you mean the sensor will magically sign it's own data? Perhaps there would need to be an entity that would maintain said sensor in order to insure that it remains in working order....

>anyone can put signed data on-chain
A scholar! But wait... perhaps indeed said entity would need some sort of economic incentive in order to make the posting of said data worthwhile... Maintenance of said sensor would surely come at a cost to someone? Yes... some sort of economic incentive to make it worthwhile and in order to encourage truthful and accurate data seems to be in order..... Hmm.... What could the solution possibly be? Perhaps.... an oracle? And perhaps there could be a network of said oracles that would all be economically incentivized to maintain their sensors and data sources and to provide truthful accurate data in order to not provide a single point of failure and in order to increase the security and reliability of said network.... Hmm..... I think I'm on to something lads....

>>18904499
Why has Chainlink not mentioned anything about working with China on their blockchain network?

>>18909531
>I need a python script that downloads data from a signed api. You can call that an oracle, but in any case I don't need chainlink or anything similar.

This. I never understood what the end game from these shitcoins was. Its literally not better than blasting soap envelopes or idocs at each other's ERP systems.

>>18909531
>so you agree it's just a centralized oracle service? ok
The sources may be centralized, but that doesn’t change the fact that the oracles are decentralized.

> I need a script that downloads data from a signed api.
That’s an oracle.

>>18909531
>so you agree it's just a centralized oracle service? ok
Centralized sources still need decentralized oracles.

> You can call that an oracle
That's what they are.

>but in any case I don't need chainlink or anything similar.
Your centralized oracle is going to have shit uptime and security compared to basic decentralized oracles.
Not to mention all the additional options and features Chainlink inherently provides (TEEs, threshold sigs, mixicles, etc. etc. etc.).