Here we go

[Anonymous No.23423800]

https://twitter.com/OffchainLabs/status/1319015917309874177

[Anonymous No.23423930]

Sir.

[Anonymous No.23423962]

>>23423800
Please sirs do buy LINK, is very good investment we expect to see 1000 in little over 1 month sirs.

[Anonymous No.23423965]

>>23423800
Checked
How did they manage to get the Twitter link to end in 77?

[Anonymous No.23424014]

Imagine all the top 10 ETH gas guzzlers getting ported over to their own Arb sidechain, and the sudden massive increase in headroom ETH would experience, and the things filling that headroom would ALSO be on Arb sidechains so you can just keep adding and adding more complex applications and ETH just runs smooth as butter the whole time. FUCK.
Happening. All gonna make it. All in this together.

[Anonymous No.23424028]

>>23423965
Oracles.

[Anonymous No.23424056]

>>23424028
Is there anything they can't do?

[Anonymous No.23424078]

>>23423800

[Anonymous No.23424094]

>>23423800
Just buy PNK

[Anonymous No.23424095]

>>23424056
Oracles will get us all a cute gf by 2022, trustlessly.

[Anonymous No.23424110]

>>23424078
Nice SCAM ID

[Anonymous No.23424130]

DEAD ON ARRIVAL

[Anonymous No.23424343]

I can't be the only one who holds loads of chainlink but doesn't give a fuck about Arbitrum
Like, there is so much competition for the scalability problem, and besides L2 will always be less secure anyway.

I just want staking and mixicles. Scalability will be solved in its own time.

[Anonymous No.23424394]

>>23424343
>40k TPS on ETH, 1000x cheaper, coming out Q1 next year
>doesn't give a fuck
sounds like a personal problem, anon

[Anonymous No.23424655]

>>23424343
I care about it simply because it's not in the best interest of CL to keep having to re-imburse node operators because of high gas fees.

[Anonymous No.23424709]

>>23424394
TPS is just one part of the scalability problem, loads of chains have already achieved high TPS at the cost of some decentralization/security
The only people who can be excited at this are newbies to crypto imo, or people who haven't really watched the space

[Anonymous No.23424771]

>>23424709
Why does an Arbitrum sidechain need to be more decentralized than the permissioned nodes that are validating the contract execution and can resolve disputes down to single commands in the smart contract code, with only one honest validator required for correct execution?

[Anonymous No.23425097]

>>23424130
Nice fud, but you’re also a retard at the same time.

[Anonymous No.23425449]

>>23424771
one type of attack I can imagine is raising non-stop disputes so you have to keep returning to main-chain to slow down the side-chain
that's just off the top of my head. I'm tired of this stuff.

[Anonymous No.23425602]

>>23423800
>Another "L2 Solution" sidechain
Yikes

[Anonymous No.23426262]

>>23425449
>raising non stop disputes
And losing your validator stake on every dispute, that is quickly resolved by atomizing the code? So essentially just constantly pouring your money into losing battles? That's your best argument from someone who's "really watched the space"?

[Anonymous No.23426517]

>>23425602
>>23425449