/biz/ - Business & Finance

cross chain bridging sounds like a far more lucrative segment compared to price feeds (pure profit vs hard to monetize)
so not difficult to see they will have much fiercer competitions there
vulture parasites must be seething

>>55629059
CCIP sounds like nigger shit, ban me and free me

>>55629059
So buy layer zero and sell the pump, got it.

farm layerzero airdrop
dump it all asap for chainlink and polkadot
that's what i'm doing

reminder it was one of sbf/ftx big vc scam before he went down, sequoia was shilling it hard

>>55629059
All it takes is 1 financial institution integrating CCIP and every other bridge gets BTFO. Wormhole and LayerZero has a 0% chance of snagging a partnership like that. Then once CCIP opens up to everyone all legitimate projects will migrate and these old bridges will rug.

>>55629059
Chainlink has the talent. The people who know how to build this stuff work at Chainlink.

Valuations mean nothing when you can't find anyone to build your product.

https://en.cryptonomist.ch/2023/01/31/uniswap-problems-with-the-layerzero-bridge/

>James Prestwich of Nomad claimed that LayerZero has a backdoor that would allow it to bypass security controls to pass data without anyone’s permission.
>LayerZero co-founder Bryan Pellegrino denied the existence of such a backdoor and also denied that the team ever tried to hide it.
>Thus, it is worth noting that Pellegrino did not deny the existence of what Prestwich calls “critical vulnerabilities” in Endpoint and UltraLightNodeV2 smart contracts, but only denied that these are indeed critical vulnerabilities.
>Furthermore, Pellegrino claims that other bridges, such as Nomad and Wormhole, also have similar characteristics, stating that in the worst case scenario LayerZero functions in the same way that Wormhole or Nomad does.
>This is partly because Nomad’s very bridge in August last year was attacked by hackers who exploited an exploit to steal about $200 million in funds.

Actual fucking clowns in this industry. Other than CCIP the top 4 bridges are Wormhole which got hacked, Nomad which got hacked, Multichain which got hacked, and LayerZero who claim that "in the worst case scenario LayerZero functions in the same way that Wormhole or Nomad does," both of which got hacked lmao.

whatever happened here?
and why does this need two tokens, zro and stg? (besides scamming retail twice)

>>55629559
insane

>>55629059
layer zero is complete garbage compared to chainlink.. the end

>>55629599
>2024
its over layer br0s

>>55629059
Both are shit.
ZetaChain will dominate the Layer 0 war.

scam vc deals with the promise of tokens constitute an unregistered securities offering.
dumping 700k every week on binance, funnily enough, isn't.
Link marines win again.

>>55629059
>Layer Zero is already valued at 3 billions before dropping a token, by VC funding.
At this point I have to think that most "big" projects are like this. Only a small fraction if their real "liquid supply" is traded on the public market, thus artificially inflating the price. This is similar to what Richard Heart does with HEX/Pulse Chain - keep 95% of all tokens to himself but say they are public traded, let 5% float and obviously some retards will always buy. Now that 5% traded supply gets multiplied with 20x (the 95% that is claimed to be available supply, but isnt) and tada, huge market cap.

Lets look at some numbers:

Coin / Mcap / Trade volume / Mcap divided by Trade volume
BTC / 580bn / 10 bn / 58
ETH / 227bn / 4.3 bn / 52
XRP / 40 bn / 1.7 bn / 23
BNB / 37 bn / 0.36 bn / 102
ADA / 11 bn / 0.2 bn / 55
SOL / 10.3 bn / 0.38 bn / 27
TRX / 7.8 bn / 0.62 bn / 12
TON / 5 bn / 0.036bn / 140
LINK / 4.4 bn / 0.38 bn / 11
ATOM / 3.2 bn / 0.06 bn / 53

LINK has the lowest market cap relative to trading volume. If it was on the same ratio as BTC/ETH and would be 50, then that would imply x4 market cap from here.

>>55629059
Chainlink has no competition
It’s over, we won
If you are a dapp, why would you choose the solution that isn’t going to get you potential access to trillions in bank chains.
If you are not buying this now, you are not meant to make it.

They're already doing deals paying millions in tokens to actual scams who will instadump on any big pump for runway.

I don't think their team has what it takes (not even close) to actually compete with LINK, but to OPs point market is not reflective of fundamentals right now and VC tokens usually have a lot of marketing(money) backed hype to get their multiple.

If it helps anyone the VC firms I talk to these days are usually just looking for a 4-5x in the current market. So I think it's a pretty safe bet to buy right away and get an easy 3x and get out.

Not to say it won't pump way more off desperate retail baggies but once the VCs are out you're playing a dangerous game.

>>55630665
The entire game at this point has become "how do we dump the most amount of tokens possible on retail so we can build runway" because

1) Everyone knows they're not building anything of value
2) VCs have largely exited, if you're raising it's way less than it would have been in a bull market like 10-100x less

If you don't do a HUGE premine for runway people in this industry actually laugh at you for not being smart enough to scam retail. It's pretty fucking sad.

Chainlink is an anomaly in the space. Same with ETH. They don't even communicate with the scam layer, which is really most other projects and certainly the vast majority of the top 20. It's one of the main reasons I keep actually buying LINK. They're quite literally in a league of their own. That is why everyone hates them, jealousy.

If you mention Chainlink in a room full of these multi millionaire/billionaire grifters they just seethe but fully understand how critical the tech is. None of them thought of it and they're all struggling to make their dying pieces of shit better than the next scammers dying piece of shit because it's such an ego-jerk contest, yet Sergey has already came all over the floor they're standing on and their shoes are sticky.

LayerZero getting funded literally was just VC seethe over not getting to get a piece of Chainlink early. That's the only reason it even exists.

>>55629059
So you're saying that if you actually want to make money in the next bullrun you should buy Layer Zero tokens?

>>55630767
Market seems to at least have woken up to their schemes, no one gives a shit about Aptos despite how hard they shilled it
What ever happened to fair ICOs

>>55630827
Retail retards like those who spend all day on Reddit have memories of fish and buy in fully to crowd mentality. They don't do a single shred of research. You buy hype in places like that and it lasts long enough to get what you need and get out. Whether or not those morons keep it going amongst themselves is anyone's guess, often they can do it for a real long time (see GME, Safemoon, and other things that still have baggies today who think their investment is going to pay off long term where the people with the majority of equity stake have already left the building).

>>55629300
The team migrated the contract just to turn ftx's remaining tokens into dirt, I think they broke up

>>55629361
sergey partnered with mcdonalds to release a turd on your head

layer zero is absolute garbage

Token not needed for either

link airdrop when

>>55629059
>3 billions
The way you wrote “billions” instead of just “billion” just proved to me that you’re a streetshitting monkey faggot. KYS

>“In the worst case, the system is as secure as the Chainlink DON [decentralized oracle network], which is a pretty good worst case.”
https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2021/09/16/interoperability-startup-layerzero-comes-out-of-stealth-with-6m-in-funding/

It isn’t a competition LayerZero uses Chainlink.

>>55630791
I don’t understand. Why don’t these VCs buy in like the rest of us. It is a losing game trying to fund a competitor yet they still do. Why?

>>55629059
>Chainlink
>Layer Zero
Why does everything tech related have to revolve around LINK with you faggots why can't we embrace alternative tech in the form of Marlin that could also solve some really interesting infrastructural problems such as censorship. Marlin's Oyster could be the answer to AWS' monopoly on pretty much the whole internet since they've got everyone by balls.

>>55635798
they simply cannot stand the fact that if they buy chainlink, they make us richer beyond our wildest dreams

>>55629059
I like layerzero. With that said its purpose is different than CCIP. Layerzero is all onchain. Works well for simply traversing tokens across chains. CCIP can do this as well as allow contracts to connect to secure, trust minimized offchain computation. This is where the real value lies in CCIP.

>>55629149
No please ban me instead.

>>55635866

marlin is a layer 0 in the sense that it doesn't even exist. it's vaporware trash

>>55635866
>check CMC
>doesn't even make it to the top 100
Sorry kiddo but you'll have to step up your game

>>55635925
Just shill whatever dog coin got banned for spamming and call it a day fag

>>55635866
I'd whip those devs into actually working on their product if I were you to show your dominance as an investor mate.

Right now it seems like they're doing fuck all with your liquidity to me, but you do you.

>>55635798
>Why don’t these VCs buy in like the rest of us. It is a losing game trying to fund a competitor yet they still do.
It's a losing game long term but only if you're retail. VCs are able to get in on the ground floor with competitors, drive a narrative about how cross-chain is the future, dump their shitcoins on retail, and then ride off into the sunset. With LINK they were not able to get in on the ground floor and they have no control over anything because it isn't a scam. VCs need at least partial control of the project and reliable returns in a relatively short time frame.

>>55635798
Vcs dump on retail. They will never buy retail bags.
Link exit liquidity won't come from VCs.

layer zero is absolute rubbish compared to LINK

>>55629559
This is bullish for LayerZero. Scams pump hardest

>>55636845
why?

apples and oranges.

bridging tokens is a side affect of CCIP but it was never the issue being solved.

The issue is: because different chains are their own thing, it is impossible with 100% verification to peg the price of one chain to the other and even more complex to then swap that price over. The ever changing states of each chain in separate environments is extremely hard to verify and trust ccip solves this.

ccip has leveraged its oracle network and other highly technical things to essentially trust the peg through it entirety. Therefore allowing an accurate bridge.

Layer zero just takes price feeds calculates it at a high scale and spit out what you'll get. Low tier shit done at a high level still sucks