/biz/ - Business & Finance

No need

>>54551250
WHAAT you could just api call a website like coinbase?
damn if only chainlink would have thought about that
they wasted 5 years of their life lol
dumb sergiii

>>54551244
The token isn't needed

>>54551250
lmao your spamming this image in every thread. anyone with a brain can clearly see it has significant issues. If your smart contract is dealing with small amounts of money its probably fine, but if its handling hundreds of millions of dollars it would be incredibly vulnerable by using http

>>54551359
95% of the time it's working without failure, so it will work with billions of dollars too. it's the 80/20 rule: everything about 80 will be enough for investors and banks

>>54551406
lmao except theres no "undo" button like with traditional finance. billions of dollars lost to a smart contract reporting the wrong data is a catrastrophic failure, it needs to work 100% of the time.

>>54551250
Chainlink:
>source (API) => oracle => contract

CCIP:
>source (API) => canister => contract

So what the fuck is the difference?

>>54551250
Chainlink:
>source (API) => oracle => contract

ICP:
>source (API) => canister => contract

So what the fuck is the difference?

>>54551501
ICP doesn't require an off chain third party to trust and pay for.

>>54551250
I have equal parts LINK and ICP in my folio, but this infographic is retarded and ignores the whole oracle problem. ICP https calls are sufficient for noncritical data but not for safety critical applications. For those you need a consensus mechanism, i.e. a DON, i.e. Chainlink. Niggers tongue my anus.

>>54551519
The canister acts as the oracle, dumbass.
Oracles inherently work both off-chain and on-chain.

>>54551519
>>54551534
Who's currently using the ICP "oracles"? Surely there's a vast number of big companies using this "superior" tech.

>>54551534
chainlink is a third party off chain entity required for an oracle solution
ICP simply has them built in. no third party trust required. less points of failure. superior tech.
>>54551551
canister deployment has been constantly growing during a bear market
how are those link partnerships working out for your heavy bags?

>>54551571
Can't name any? Thought so, kek.

>>54551579
hahaha holy shit you're mad

>>54551571
>chainlink is a third party off chain entity
So are canisters.
A canister is pretty much like having one of the parties to the smart contract running a single Chainlink node.

>>54551551
>Who's currently using the ICP "oracles"?
nobody
They're centralized oracles, and we all know what happens to those.

>>54551587
kek, my point stands.
u mad bro?

>>54551599
canisters are not off chain third parties. ICP doesn't require chainlink, a completely different third party, to use oracles. link is not needed.
>>54551617
>it hasn't been mass adopted yet in it's early lifespan therefore it never will be
wow sick dude
token not needed lol

>>54551535
the consensus mechanism is literally in that infograph lmao

>>54551244
0.1 link has been deposited into your community advocate account.
This is a paid shill thread

>>54551679
>canisters are not off chain third parties
They're not third parties if they're one of the contracting parties, no. Fucking lmao
Here's a protip: that's not a good thing.

Imagine making a contract where the other guy has to pay you $20 when your plane is late.
But the other guy is the one who gets to input the time of your plane's arrival.

>>54551712
>the consensus mechanism is literally in that infograph
Yeah, the ICP blockchain nodes all have to agree that what the oracle said is true lmao
Do you have any idea how retarded that is?

>>54551244

>>54551726
holy shit you're retarded
chainlink is the third party being referenced. ICP doesn't need a third party to provide oracles. it is built in. chainlink is not needed. that's the point.
>nooo this third party oracles provider named chainlink will come to a better consensus because..just because it will, okay!

>>54551571
>>54551587
>>54551719
>>54551726
>>54551767
no one uses icp oracles, or you could name them.
>but they will!
fuck off. clearly you've been bested and now you're seething for all to see. seethe, cope, and dilate faggots

>>54551767
>ICP doesn't need a third party to provide oracles.
Not if one of the contracting parties fetches the data.

If you want you can very easily replicate this with Chainlink, just have one of the contracting parties run the node.
It's a very retarded way of working though; you have to trust the other party won't simply input the wrong data.

>>54551250
>canister gets the data
>then the nodes reach consensus on the correctness of the data

How the fuck does this work? Do all the nodes go check the data source for themselves?
Also, what nodes? The ICP blockchain mining nodes? Because if so, then god help you.

What a disaster of a setup.

>>54551456
I don't think that anon is being serious

>>54551902
Even if all the nodes went and said "yeah that's the data I get too" that data itself could be wrong/misleading if it's single sourced.

This is why Chainlink price feed nodes use multiple data sources and submit their own median (in order to be closest to the definitive truth of something like a market price) before the Chainlink software/contract does its own aggregation of the results.

>>54551250

Would be a shame if I just DDOS'ed your stupid little server, and in doing do game the contract.

>literally any 14 year old, who can tell the difference between a search engine and a web browser, is technically savvy enough to game the system, but that's totally fine

lol, lmao even

>>54551989
I think the actual ICP setup is a lot worse than that.
They make a point of saying the canister first gets the data, and THEN the 'nodes' reach consensus; not on its correctness, but "on what the data is".
So it looks like they just have nodes all look at whatever the canister fetched and then agree "yup, that's the data".
It's baffling how stupid it is.

Imagine if only one Chainlink node actually fetched data, and then a bunch of other Chainlink nodes look at it and simply have to agree on what that one node said lmaooooo

>>54551250
topkek they just went back in time to the entirely useless 2018 version of oracles
amazing.

>>54552067
>it looks like they just have nodes all look at whatever the canister fetched and then agree "yup, that's the data"
That's exactly it.

you can go read the article if you want to educate yourself further
https://medium.com/dfinity/beyond-oracles-direct-https-outcalls-from-canister-smart-contracts-on-the-internet-computer-2e4a5bcbee43
chainlink, a third party oracle provider, is not needed.
there's absolutely zero reason to extend your trust boundary to chainlink or pay their fees.

>>54551250
A4 propaganda paper
shitty medium
This aint it chief.

Meanwhile dominic sold your ass to VC's and they are fuuuucking your shitcoin to the oblivion. Your shitcoin is not even a pump and dump its a dump and dump.

>>54552506
another seething link baggie his entire token lost it's use case

>>54552558
At least it can lose its use case. Better than becoming a VC pre-market paypig.

>>54552656
>At least it can lose its use case. Better than becoming a VC pre-market paypig.