/biz/ - Business & Finance

It's unironically over.
Banks built their own Chainlink and will just use Canton instead of Link.
They fucking rugged Sirgay while patting him on the back at SIBOS, it's fucking over.
LINK has no use case anymore.

>>56339384
>>56339404

>>56339442
Aren't you tired of losing, baggie?

>>56339457
>Aren't you tired of losing, baggie?

>>56339442
CITI literally just announced they're going with Canton for their tokenization/interoperability solution.
They tested CCIP, stole the idea and now all banks/institutions will just use Canton.

Sergey was too fucking slow and naive, institutions just rugged him.

Is this a threat to my significant investments in Mobius, BAND, Tellor, ZAP, Aeternity, NuLINK and Chronicle?

>>56339466
Show me the article

>>56339524
Literally just read this thread:
>>56338972

The only remaining bullcase for LINK just died.

>>56339466
>CITI literally just announced they're going with Canton for their tokenization/interoperability solution.
>They tested CCIP, stole the idea and now all banks/institutions will just use Canton.
>Sergey was too fucking slow and naive, institutions just rugged him
>>56339534
>The only remaining bullcase for LINK just died.

>>56339534
I read the Canton WP when it first came out. It's good for a laugh if you have even a remedial understanding of what's going on. Highly recommend.

>>56339384
>>56339404
>>56339457
>>56339466
>>56339534
Kek fuddies

>>56339534
this is the tryhard 13pbtid fuddie in the other thread kek

>>56339555
CITI and HKEX are now running on Canton.
It's over for link.

>>56339534
Thank you

>>56339567
>CITI and HKEX are now running on Canton.
>It's over for link.

>>56339555
haven't read it anon.
care to cliff note it for us?

>>56339567
Fuddie

>>56339404
we can spot you a mile away you stinking nigger, go back to twitter with the other shitskins

>>56339579
>no global state so no way to determine fuckery
>absolutely retarded interop, domains are only composable if every single member of domain A is also in domain B, in which case, uh, why even have 2 domains
Read it yourself:
https://www.canton.io/publications/canton-whitepaper.pdf

>>56339634
this is a jeet board, unironically there are more white people and better alpha on twitter

>>56339384
>>56339404
>>56339466
>>56339534

>institutions just created yet another L1
>that proves that they will only use a single L1

>>56339565
Refute anything being said.

>>56339687
It's not even an L1, it's like if you got a bunch of corporate retards together and said "Make something that kind of could be confused for a blockchain, but make sure it doesn't have any of the characteristics that actually make a blockchain valuable, because we still want opaque systems that we can scam on."
It's a joke.

>>56339709
And why would banks want a public blockchain instead of a private bespoke L1 that they can scam on?
Chainlink is never getting adopted.

>>56339708
Right here: >>56339687

>>56339717
>a private bespoke L1
There are dozens, if not hundreds.

>>56339466
This is exactly what Schmidt warned him about last year. But no, obese russian philosophy major knows better than CEO of the most important company in the world.

>>56339717
Chainlink isn't settlement infrastructure, it's interoperability infrastructure. Canton's interoperability requires composable domains to have identical members. It literally can't, and doesn't pretend to, communicate across domains with different participants.
Literally every bank in the world could adopt this stupid bullshit, and they would still all need Chainlink to talk to each other.

Kek Link is literally mooning, fuddie narrative btfo lmao

>>56339825
>+0,41%
>mooning
kekbaggies are mindbroken

>>56339668
cheers

>>56339725
This.
He had it all and he fucking fumbled it.

There's no benefits to institutions using Chainlink if they can just use a walled copycat solution.
What a fuck up.

>>56339725
>>56339854
sergey wanted to keep CL Labs as a remote "company" to more easily dump the treasury, Sergey loves "working" alone in his office and home, eating BURGERS

>>56339854
>if they can just use a walled copycat solution
>a walled copycat solution
>a

kek institutions have been shitting out more and more private chains every year.
And guess what: the more there are, the more bullish for CCIP.

>>56340030
Canton network is the only one they all agreed on.
They'll just use that for everything.
Canton isn't a blockchain, it's literally CCIP for institutions.

>>56340164
>Canton network is the only one they all agreed on
Lol no it isn’t

>Canton isn’t a blockchain
Why not? Because it has subnets? Guess Avax isn’t a blockchain either then.
Canton can’t actually connect any chains, only its own subnets.

>>56340180
All banks will be on Canton so no need for multiple chains.

>>56340209
>All banks will be on Canton
No, they’ll all be on Ripple!
No wait, on ETH!
No wait, on Quorum!
No wait, on Hyperledger!
Etc.

>>56340233
Ripple, ETH, Quorum and everything else were bullshit VC scam public blockchains.
Canton is funded and designed from the ground up as a bank only solution.
This is how they adopt crypto retard, public tokens not needed.

>>56340209
Kek fuddies

>>56340164
>Canton network is the only one they all agreed on.
source? quote or screenshot, don't give me a webpage

>>56340295
>funded and designed from the ground up as a bank only solution
So is virtually every private chain.

So many Canton threads all of a sudden, this is very organic. Reminds me of Rubic.

>>56340392
the reason, it seems, that there are multiple canton threads at the same time is because Citi went live on two blockchain platforms. Huge news right?

It is big news for a biz / crypto board. There's a major western financial institution using DLT and it's doing so for reasons connected to the current themes of tokenization and RWA's.

The thing is, as things stand, it's doing it without Chainlink. It is doing it with DAML. That's Digital Assets inc, not Chainlink. Sure, down the line, when HKEX Synapse - which is where Citi is doing this work - wants to connect to other chains they will likely have to use CCIP and other chainlink services, so this could be considered bullish for chainlink.
On the other hand, right now, the fact of the matter is Citi is using DLT for tokenization, stable coin, bond and lending ventures, and they are doing it without using CCIP, which isn't such a bullish thing at all.

In the grand scheme of things, it shows an appetite for t+0 amongst financial institutions (which is saying something in itself because t+1 isn't even here yet) and if t+0 is going to happen then you'd imagine DLT is the only play in town.
That, however, is bullish in a sometime in the next decade type of situation.

The Canton news is interesting either way.

>>56339687
>Public blockchains have shown the way, particularly on these two points, although Digital Asset has no plans to integrate with them. “They’ve created absolutely the North Star of what’s possible,” said Digital Asset’s Eric Saraniecki.
>“I don’t ever want to say that they’re not good or they’re bad. They’re just not fit for purpose for regulated financial institutions.”
>He compared public blockchains to Napster. While Napster laid the groundwork for digital music, it was risky to use. The IP-licensed and user friendly Apple iTunes put digital music on the map.
>“On a public blockchain you have to use the same set of validators. You have to compete for bandwidth on the network. All your data is completely transparent. Those are complete non starters for a regulatory compliant institution,” added Saraniecki.
>DAML applications and the Canton Network are privacy preserving by design. At the same time, an application developer can choose to make their app fully accessible to the public.

>>56339725
desu this is why sergey has been more aggressive lately but will he have enough backing and steam to actually pull this shit out? its looking pretty bad right now

>>56341412
You know private chains are also L1s, right?

>>56341549
and? they could just use this one L1 if they force it down our throats. ethereum doesn't have any big hit app like chatgpt

>>56341799
>they could just use this one L1
Who's "they"?

>>56339549
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDE b b but the intern at Citi wrote that Link was going to the quadrillions in 2021!!!!

HAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

>>56341843
You know what banks will need if they want to interoperate between Canton and other (private) L1s?
CCIP

>>56341809
the banking cartel

>>56341882
The same banking cartel that loves to constantly make more private chains?

>>56341862
yeah I know buddy.... they'll need LE SECRET R R R RIGHT MARINESSSSTHHHH????

>>56341446
>aggression
more like false bravado... it's pure desperation

>>56341916
>LE SECRET
what?
Swift is constantly shilling CCIP, it's hardly a secret.

>>56341898
I sure hope they just make more chains and struggle to organize behind one L1

>>56342024
Even if they did rally behind a single L1, it would still need oracles.
Defi is full of single non-interoperating L1s that switched to Chainlink after their oracles failed.

>>56342091
true, there would still be stuff oracles are needed for

>>56342091
>dear flimsy oracle node run out of a student dorm on stolen electricity, what is the exchange rate for yen? i'm a giant bank, but i just have nobody else i can trust

>>56342248
Remember that time Compound trusted Coinbase's price feed oracle?

>>56342283
yeah, that was hilarious. it's unrelated though, these are banks, they don't need price feeds for shitcoins. for the things they do care about, there are already established solutions

>>56342555
>there are already established solutions
For putting data on-chain there is literally only one "established" solution.
Everything else has failed miserably, even Coinbase, Maker, etc.

Gah, I'm seriously considering dumping my Chainlink for bitcoin now, or some other stupid gamble shitcoin.

This is essentially XRP all over again, with endless "muh big tech, revolutionary for world banking!" promises, only to fumble the bag to centralization. By this, I mean they propose big promises, but behind the veil is that these institutions (Ripple and Chainlink labs being the biggest examples) fail to understand that centralization is simply the way of the world. Therefore, JPMorgan, Citi and the like will simply come up with their own centralized product that steals an idea from a decentralized product, and run with it. Remember how Zuckerberg stole the idea of Facebook from his roommate at Harvard? Now Zuckerberg is a millionaire.

In other words, these big guys/major financial institutions understand how the real black pill in making billions works. The secret sauce is to steal an innovative idea from someone else who is too autistic or slow to understand how the normie world works, and they run away with it with their marketing expertise and become rich.

I honestly feel sorry for the people who put their entire life savings into LINK. Their big failure was misunderstanding that Sergey's spergness would be Chainlink Lab's ultimate downfall. He ignored Schmidt's warnings and here you all are now.

>>56342642
it's not that bad, there is still the chance that many people will believe that link is a good solution, driving the price up. that's probably the last chance to sell for a profit

>>56342585
>putting data on-chain
in the end, it's a series of computers copying data from one place to the other. that's the majority of instructions a computer has, it's the most basic operation they can do. only trusted banks will be part of this system, so all the staking and rube goldberg machine levels of incentive structures aren't needed. also no shoehorning a token into the process to pay devs and fat founders, it gets financed because it's custom built to provide value. maybe they'll copy and paste some of the link code that retail paid for, that's just good roi

>>56339725
>This is exactly what Schmidt warned him about last year.
Link?

>>56343699
no, canton

>>56343709
Lol I was asking for the source.

>>56339534
Hey! I remember you from the other thread! Did you manage to squeeze in a good meal of curry and have a nice diarrhea in the street between threads?

>>56339384
Fuddies

>>56339744
This ^^

>>56339854
>He had it all and he fucking fumbled it.

>>56340164
>it's literally CCIP for institutions.

>>56343796
please forgive him bro english is a second language for him so anytime he sees the word "link" he has been instructed to push back

Oh yeah well if Chainlink is such a scam why doesn't it moon???
Checkmate incels

retard here
from what i can tell canton is currently just testnet and by invitation only. you can't even read the whitepaper without subscribing to their newsletter. from the outside though it seems like a solution for smaller players who can't/won't make their own solution. i also haven't read anything about them connecting to any public blockchains or real world data. is this just a sandbox for asset swapping between institutions or am i missing something?

Wait you mean we can just pay our own off chain data sources instead of the ones picked by a Russian scammer and then pretend it's trustless because we pushed the data on chain?

>>56344747
You are so far behind on things you can't even pile in correctly on a FUD thread anymore lmaooo. This is an interoperability FUD thread, not an off chain data fud thread.

Why does the Canton whitepaper compare Canton against other L1s/settlement infrastructure instead of against Chainlink?

Remember how smug sergey was in 2021? "If you're not using this, you will be left behind"

Low and behold, HE got left behind top kek, this will make for some great tv one day. Sergey is the Chuck Rhoades of crypto, just keeps getting btfo whether it's Celsius, Bancor, or Banks

>low and behold

>>56344626
i hold over 70 chainlink tokens show some respect

>>56344835
Canton is an L1 with subnets, similar to Avax. It is in no way a competitor to Chainlink. If anything, link just gained another node operator.

>>56344914
Citi is tokenising the HKex assets without using link at all, that is what's important. They somehow have to bridge their tradfi data to this canton thing and link is nowhere to be seen. This is quite worrying tbdesu

Oh stinky linkies. Is Chainlink even its own major city with 70,000 people living in it? It's not strong enough to ever support that. Chainlink is nowhere to be found on the map. Canton is the oldest blockchain, having been around since 1805.

>>56339384
These kind of threads are so boring.
It is just 95% brainlet retarded LINK holders who don’t understand fuck all about their investment “ironic fudding” trying to bait out people who do understand to explain the situation to them.

Essentially a bunch of idiots who are worried and need someone to calm them so they post inflammatory things to try bait someone capable of understanding it to tell them they are wrong, and reassure them.
It is so fucking pathetic and i stopped playing into these dumb ass rednecks shit years ago.

If you want a spoon feed and you are worried, fucking ask and admit it. Then i’ll grace you with one

>>56344954
i wonder if they plan to run parallel books and phase out legacy recordkeeping as specific digital contracts become the norm for legacy asset types, i.e. they'll offer the option of blockchain settlement or swift settlement but keep track of changes on both until there is no reason to justify swift messaging as the reliability and speed of blockchain settlement is proven beyond doubt.

>>56345076
>If you want a spoon feed and you are worried, fucking ask and admit it. Then i’ll grace you with one
Please grace me, is this Canton really a link competitor or not?

>>56345076
thoughts on
>>56344728

>>56344825
It's both at once but ultimately the veil of the global banking cabal will be far beyond my vision so I'll just keep holding

>>56345086
It's not even pretending to be a link competitor
>>56344835

It's like saying that Tesla is a threat to McDonalds.

>>56339567
>citation needed

>>56342642
Thank you for your concern over my financial interest.

This perfectly explains the price action. insiders are simply not frontrunning or buying link becauee they know its not needeed

>>56339466
Yeah. It's a tale as old as time

Genius figures something out. Bank Backed "Inventor" learns how to market it. They all reap the rewards except genius inventor.

Tesla to Edison
Woz to Jobs
MySpace to Facebook

And in Tech today, a week is a decade.
LINK is fucked...

>>56345846
i see this is the new fud narrative, carry on i guess

>>56345455
If it was anything but this, link would be $15 minimum. Institutions aren’t buying or “accumulatooorrrrin” your bags, retards

>>56345883
I used to carry link

Now I only carry the weight of my words and my balls.

>>56339384
Thanks OP. Just sold my link stack for canton tokens

https://youtu.be/9mOvZI2KF7o?si=PQYPv571sdKWxX5G&t=3

>>56345915
Kek nice timing as Link moons

>>56343277
>only trusted banks will be part of this system
Yes, the Swift system. Which includes CCIP.

>>56346045
>$7.34

Oh my god it’s mooooooning

>>56345915
Institutions can accumulate ungodly amounts, and the price will remain low since (((someone))) keeps dumping Bitcoin every time Link threatens to break out.

>>56346122
if you don't understand your own investment, it's probably better not to advertise it. other holders will feel like only idiots hold link. that's where the self reflection starts, you don't want that process to happen

>>56346765
How do you not know that Swift is basically one huge management board of all the world’s banks.

>>56341843
>DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDE b b but the intern at Citi wrote that Link was going to the quadrillions in 2021!!!!
>HAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>>56341916
>yeah I know buddy.... they'll need LE SECRET R R R RIGHT MARINESSSSTHHHH????
>>56342248
>dear flimsy oracle node run out of a student dorm on stolen electricity, what is the exchange rate for yen? i'm a giant bank, but i just have nobody else i can trust
>>56342555
>yeah, that was hilarious. it's unrelated though, these are banks, they don't need price feeds for shitcoins. for the things they do care about, there are already established solutions
>>56343178
>it's not that bad, there is still the chance that many people will believe that link is a good solution, driving the price up. that's probably the last chance to sell for a profit
>>56343277
>>putting data on-chain
>in the end, it's a series of computers copying data from one place to the other. that's the majority of instructions a computer has, it's the most basic operation they can do. only trusted banks will be part of this system, so all the staking and rube goldberg machine levels of incentive structures aren't needed. also no shoehorning a token into the process to pay devs and fat founders, it gets financed because it's custom built to provide value. maybe they'll copy and paste some of the link code that retail paid for, that's just good roi

>>56344954

this is what the conversation should be about.

DLT is being used by a big financial institution and CCIP, or chainlink oracles, are nowhere to be found.

Should Synapse want to connect with xyz chain then yeah, you'd figure it's CCIP that will do it, and if there isn't an established way to pull data ( getting data on chain isn't the preserve of chainlink oracles, especially not in a fenced off invitation only blockchain ) then you'd reckon it's chainlink which will be doing it,

but basically, just because Sergey said that there will be no monopolistic L1 doesn't mean there will be no monopolistic L1.

It's certainly within the realms of feasibility that one L1 might win out with regards to xyz tokenization and all of that action happens there, while perhaps another L1 wins out with all abc tokenization and all that action happens there, and sure, CCIP via Swift can link them up when one asset is used as security for another very different type somewhere else, but if all the action for xyz is taking place within the fenced off world of one L1, say Canton for arguments sake, then CCIP is getting none of those fees until some of that value is moved off from there.

Down the line, even, if Canton, or whichever L1 demonstrates it is good at doing what it claims to do, then on that L1 another type of xyz2 tokenization might take place. Now interoperability between all the rwa's tokenized on xyz and all the rwa's tokenized on xyz2 is all taking place without CCIP.

Just because Sergey said it's going to happen one way doesn't mean it is going to happen that way.

Ps. am never selling because i still think chainlink wins out, but there are people out there who see a very different DLT + big finance future to how Sergey see's it.

>>56346897
Deranged FUD like this post is the main reason I fucked off back to Twitter!

Who's with me?

>>56346897
Good post

>>56346897
Good post. Reminds me of old biz, this is the conversation we should be having. But now with avocados ruining the board I'm pretty sure your post will be met with muh fuddies and muh baggie

>>56346897
Thanks, you put my thoughts + more into words in an understandable way.

>>56346897
This is what I like to see.

>>56346950
Nice try, fuddie

>>56346960
You fags constantly crying about avocados are way more annoying than permabulls, seriously.

>hurr your post will be met with muh fuddies and muh baggie

>hurr watch your post get downvoted!!

Fucking nerd

>>56346950
care to explain why it's deranged?

the CCIP argument is predicated on 'digital islands' / 'silos' etc.
It's a strong argument.
I buy it, literally.

However, i fail to see why if a private enclosed L1 is particularly adept at doing xyz asset tokenization, and the participants are happy with it, that then the same L1 won't offer xyz2 and xyz3 tokenization on their platform?

This isn't specifically about Canton, but, to make it easier, if Canton shows it self to be good at handling the equities market HKEX synapse, you think they won't then offer a similar service for another equities market? and then another? and then another? and so on?

As i said, i can easily imagine that this is what Canton are in fact planning (i don't know this, to be clear, but can be inferred) .

And, then, if Canton do achieve some type of market dominance, or even just significant market share, of xyz asset tokenization across many different markets, then, all of that trading and all those transfers and all that liquidity will be inside their own walled garden, and, as i said before, yeah, when they want to move said asset off of the platform somewhere else as, say, a security, then yeah, again i think it'll be CCIP, but it means that CCIP gets a lot less of the play.

Look, this isn't so different to before when there was a proliferation of L1's. That's ultimately bullish for chainlink but for one caveat, which is, CITI is live with this platform and till now, CCIP and oracles are nowhere to be found.

>>56347036
Anon, pretty much all (private chains) are good at shitting out tokens, and always have been.
Even Bitcoin can do it now.

You're severely confused.

>>56347066
could well be that I am.

mind elaborating?

>>56347080
Midwit issue. They have been educated by original marines on l1s only trade tokens but link connect to the outside world. So they repeat this because their brain is not able to process the new assumption you've just suggested. That's nulink cultists for you

>>56347104
>>56347080
Still doesn’t solve the oracle problem…

>>56347080
>>56347104
Canton is an L1 with "subnets".
Similar L1s have existed for a long time, like Avalanche.
You can fill in the rest, I'm sure.

>>56347146

perhaps you've misunderstood the oracle problem and how it pertains to private (fenced off) blockchains and the mutual trust assumptions implicit in such arrangements.

>>56344914
Notice how fud spammers have no answer to this whenever it has been brought up
they are desperate for something, anything to stick
its just not happening, fudsisters
you can samefag, 20+pbtid, remake the same threads over and over again - but canton isnt a "competitor"

>>56347194

As i myself stated, L1's abound and this isn't so different to the proliferation of them that happened before, except for one significant difference, CITI has gone live (data is being pulled on chain from off) and transactions are happening and neither CCIP nor chainlink are anywhere to be found.

Sure, i can imagine that HKEX synapse is a success while a Barclays venture on another platform is a similar success and before you know it there's a want for cross chain interoperability. That's the whole argument and i genuinely buy into it, but that second step isn't necessarily concomitant to the first and the second step might well play out differently. Don't think it will, but it might, and that's a conversation worth having, but seems like all i get here are 'but oracle problem' and 'but interconnectivity is necessary' answers.

Been here a long time, etherdelta, and am never selling, and still think this is a place unlike any other, but sometimes, sometimes anon, color / colour me bemused because the quality of answers just isn't there.

>>56347249

i, for one, am not saying it is a competitor.
Am raising a different concern.

Woods for trees anon, forests for trees anon.

>>56347273
>one significant difference, CITI has gone live
This is in no way the first live tokenization project lmao

Did you know that tokenized bills of lading have been mandatory in Egypt (Suez canal) since 2021?

>>56347273
>data is being pulled on chain from off
How do they do this, any idea?

>>56347302
not saying it is the first tokenization project.

What's happening right now is the first time major financial institutions are going beyond sandboxes and actually trading tokenized assets live on major platforms.

What is achieved by derailing the thread with such a trivial piece of blah blah?

Am I supposed to say 'oh wow King Farouk was overthrown and lading blah blah straits of Gibraltar so yeah' ?

>>56347305
>No.56347218

refer above anon

>>56347302
Well yeah it isn't the first tokenisation platform, and it still does not use Chainlink to on-board assets to be tokenised. So it begs the question, will they ever use link for this usecase?

>>56347335
>not saying it is the first tokenization project.
>What's happening right now is the first time major financial institutions are going beyond sandboxes

How to contradict yourself in two consecutive sentences.

>>56347351
>So it begs the question, will they ever use link for this usecase?
If you want an answer, just look at what happened in Defi.
They started out with 99% proprietary oracles too; Maker, Compound, etc.

>>56347305
Proprietary oracles. Basically L1 validators etc. manually sending transactions with data.
You know, like how Defi started out.

>>56347365

Anon, just to be polite, your logic isn't the cutest.

So, to be clear,
i am not saying it is the first tokenization project,
never said that, at least not in essence,
but it IS the first time that major financial institutions are tokenizing significant financial instruments.

Please tell me you understand that there isn't an inherent contradiction in there.

Have all the og's migrated somewhere else and not left crumbs for me to follow?
I know i can't be the only one still here.

>>56347404
>but it IS the first time that major financial institutions are tokenizing significant financial instruments
No it isn't. I told you many tokenization projects have gone live, and you agreed.
Hence the contradiction.

>>56347464
you're being disingenuous anon.

Although it is significant in its own way, Siemens issuing 60 million isn't in the same ballpark as CITI doing equities settlement on HKEX or CITI doing syndicated loans on Versana.
One is a conglomerate that ISNT a major financial institution raising 60 million while the other IS a major financial institution getting involved in trades in multiples of hundreds of billions.

But, now that it's clear, let's put that aside. What exactly are you trying to say by showing that Siemens issued a bond on a blockchain before? Of what consequence to the discussion is it?

Doesn't change or affect any of the concerns that i have brought up - regarding chainlink and what's happened the last few days.

>>56347531
He's just trying to derail the thread and making you look bad, next step is adhominem, you're probably a 3rd worlder with a porn addiction or someone who bought the top or a Bulgarian, etc...

CCIP just connects others chains, isnt this bullish?
>>56347218
>Swift standards to enable message based connectivity.

>>56347531
>nooo that one doesn't count either!

kek I accept your copeful concession

>>56347633
Can you drop the bad faith arguments for one minute and address the actual point of that anon?
If LINK's bullish hypothesis is that X will need it to do Y and then we see X pivot to doing Y without LINK, then you either come up with a valid explanation why the hypothesis is still in play or you concede.
If the big buck smart contracts are on the same chain, CCIP isn't needed.

>>56347690
>If the big buck smart contracts are on the same chain, CCIP isn't needed.
CCIP is needed because they are not on the same chain.
t. Swift

>>56339549
>CITI literally just announced they're going with Canton for their tokenization/interoperability solution
Source please. We both know you wont provide one because that screenshot was edited.

can you stop feeding the retard who always plays semantics and keeps arguing in circles? he's a hopeless permabull, no matter what you throw at him he won't stop until he exhausts you
just stop responding to him

>>56343699 (Me)
>>56343796 (Me)
https://youtu.be/u2kOmSh4h84?t=1677
Start time is linked. Watch until Sir Gay acts like a moron (30:55).

>>56339668
Ty

>>56339744
theyre going to use multi party computation on partisia to talk to each other, you guys know nothing

>>56339384
This news is from May. It's priced in. You're missing something.