/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.56102086]

Hong Kong CBDC using Chainlink CCIP

[Anonymous No.56102108]

>>56102086
>it's real
yoooo

https://smartcon.chain.link/our-speakers

[Anonymous No.56102122]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Services_and_the_Treasury_Bureau

[Anonymous No.56102139]

Why would a Hong Kong finance minister fly all the way to Barcelona just to attend the conference of a project he has no use for? And why would they release this information just hours after another completely unrelated project mentions HK, SWIFT and CBDC? That's so crazy haha

[Anonymous No.56102143]

Kill yourselves goddamn link bagholders stop shitting up the catalog dumb niggers

[Anonymous No.56102144]

>>56102086
Is this a surprise to anyone? Of course they will use CCIP, everybody will.

[Anonymous No.56102153]

>>56102143
>posting genuine governmental use
>"shitting up the catalog"

Maybe you should just end it all right now, anon.

[Anonymous No.56102159]

>>56102143

[Anonymous No.56102167]

until LINK breaks $10 all of this is just sad cope by mindbroken bagholders

[Anonymous No.56102176]

>6$

[Anonymous No.56102183]

>>56102159
Thats off by 20km, still impressibe. How did u do it? Im mobile tho so probably thats whu, but its close u got my respect eventhough u are still a stinking linkbagholder

[Anonymous No.56102205]

>>56102086
too bad there's no real life use case and linkies are just like video game nerds sperging out over corporate partnerships

[Anonymous No.56102211]

>>56102183
>its uh only close
why did you chimp out and get jannies to delete it earlier today and the other time i posted it then? i reckon its a lot closer than that, cockroach

[Anonymous No.56102213]

>>56102205
>no real life use case

[Anonymous No.56102222]

>>56102159
Ohh do me now :))) I dares you

[Anonymous No.56102225]

>>56102211
Can you do me? Kek

[Anonymous No.56102226]

>>56102213
>will revolutionise
>will reach
all promises, no present use case you guys are schizos living on false hopes and sergey and his hr roasties are living like digital nomad kings thanks to your contributions

[Anonymous No.56102228]

>>56102211
What thread or post? Idk what ur talking about so probably wasnt me i havent reported anyone yet today so post thread also tell me how u did it i bet it only works for phone posters

[Anonymous No.56102229]

>>56102183
>it's a dutchfag
of course it is

[Anonymous No.56102231]

>>56102222
>>56102225
Probably only works for phone posters that share network

[Anonymous No.56102232]

>>56102222
>>56102225
doesnt work like that
AK is reallly fucking dumb so he has left stuff dangling around everywhere that i saved like back in jan when i first found his retarded porn diary - no super sekrit hacker shit required

[Anonymous No.56102235]

>>56102228
>i havent reported anyone yet today
>yet
>today
fuck you

[Anonymous No.56102242]

>>56102213
So if the market size of illiquid tokenized assets is $16T, can we estimate how much LINK will be needed to secure it? Is a 1:100 scale of staked LINK to secured assets reasonable? Because that would lead to a LINK price of $297 at the current supply.

[Anonymous No.56102247]

>>56102232
AK?

[Anonymous No.56102264]

>>56102247
Adem Kayser - aka "thomas" - fulltime fudding eceleb wannabe
he turned out to be a retard from Tunisia and now he lives in the Netherlands, and he's one of those guys that invested in / tried to rope other people into a pyramid scheme called The Success Factory which is also based in the Netherlands, seems to mostly hire third worlders like him

[Anonymous No.56102266]

Dude is just using info he already had on someone which might not even be the same fucking person and that guy happened to live close to there or is pretending to do for (You's).

Fucking retards you cant find someones address through 4chan idiots you guys are so gullible.

[Anonymous No.56102269]

>>56102143
Why isn’t there just a Link general at this point

[Anonymous No.56102280]

>>56102266
it is 100 percent the same person because the day his name and face was posted on his twitter he immediately shut his account down for a few days and posted here in a very obvious way until he turned it back on - just like he did when his porn diary shit was posted at the beginning of the year

[Anonymous No.56102288]

>>56102086
Love from Kazakhstan

[Anonymous No.56102290]

>>56102280
>there is only 1 person laughing at linkies

Lmao dude i legit thought u hacked me or some shit. I was restarting my phone and freaking out but i just happen to live close to that guy

Anyway thanks for confirming your delusions about a boogyman fudding your shitstink scam lmao

[. No.56102295]

>>56102143
>fuddie status
Absolutely fucking seething
Kek

[Anonymous No.56102311]

>>56102290
>i was freaking out and thought you hacked my phone
that's because you're an actual retard
and nah, i wont share how i got that location and how i know it's authentic - but it was very easy to get and publically available

[Anonymous No.56102314]

>>56102290
>I was restarting my phone and freaking out
good
it means that unconsciously you know that one day you will get whats coming

[Anonymous No.56102319]

I wonder how many people there are in the Democrat halls of power who see the gift that the US is handing the rest of the world in totally fucking this up, and who just have to look on horrified as their bosses play protection around the big banks and just absolutely skullfuck their first mover advantage on this.
Or maybe they're just honestly retarded and think it's just a libertarian scam that they can stamp out.

[Anonymous No.56102328]

>>56102319
they're just actors man, very few of them have any clue about what's going on
just extravagantly paid actors performing the "I know what's what" role for the public

[Anonymous No.56102332]

>>56102311
I dont care im not him and i dont link my 4chan and online real life activity

>>56102314
Kill yourself forever poor stinky linkbagholder

[Anonymous No.56102335]

>>56102328
I didn't mean the ones that front the cameras I mean the ones that actually make decisions.

[Anonymous No.56102348]

>>56102335
the ones that make the decisions don't care about the US they are busy transforming the world into their one WG "utopia"

[. No.56102349]

>>56102319
Interesting question. My guess is that almost no one in the current administration is aware that chainlink exists, or understands how it works. Senators and administrations are really just bagmen for corporations at this point, and when it's time for the US to integrate, they'll just follow the orders from above when given.

[Anonymous No.56102350]

>>56102332
yeah i figured you werent him
his posts are a bit different
i do wonder how easily he would give up info about people he works with if presented with the right situation though

[Anonymous No.56102356]

>the sheer integretity of insiders at all these institutions
>knowing generational wealth is but a Uniswap LINK purchase away, but being strong enough not to give in to temptation

[Anonymous No.56102360]

>>56102356
It's Bitcoin keeping the price low. They could've been buying many millions of Link over the past weeks.

[Anonymous No.56102368]

>>56102360
sure is crazy how Kaspa has been pumping non-stop against BTC then, these dummie insiders are buying the wrong coin by accident!

[Anonymous No.56102372]

>>56102368
Kaspa is allowed to do that. Any coin is.
Except Chainlink.
The second it moves, Bitcoin dumps.

[Anonymous No.56102382]

>>56102372
oh please. the only difference is Kaspa just keeps pumping when BTC dumps and LINK follows the market like a limp-wristed old man

one of them is severely undervalued, the other is only slightly undervalued, that's the real difference. I like LINK but some of you guys are delusional

[Anonymous No.56102384]

>>56102382
>Kaspa just keeps pumping when BTC dumps

Post Kaspa going up during a BTC dump.

[Anonymous No.56102396]

>>56102384
sure, check 18 aug
check the kas/btc chart for that matter

[Anonymous No.56102415]

>>56102332
you're done kid, it's over for you

[Anonymous No.56102419]

>>56102396
>check 18 aug

[Anonymous No.56102442]

>>56102419
meh, maybe there is something, who knows
the point is that LINK def made some fuckups and otherwise it wouldn't care about btc. People don't buy because they overpromised in 2020-2022 and because they changed the tokenomics from the original whitepaper. That's the real reason. If they had released the original vision for staking (which we have been begging for years) and allowed neet nodes, all the stupid fud would not have been there.
Sergey wants to be cautious and I understand that, but he screwed the bagholders in the past few years. It will go up again that's for sure, I'm just saying there were better gains to be made this bear cycle

[Anonymous No.56102478]

>>56102415
Come find me irl u stinky link baggie

[Anonymous No.56102507]

>>56102086
Chainlink really is the new XRP.

[Anonymous No.56102550]

>>56102086
This is good for chainlink

[Anonymous No.56102557]

we're actually gonna make it, huh

[Anonymous No.56102565]

Joseph Chan indeed works for the Hong Kong gov's Treasury but it seems to be distinct from the Hong Kong Monetary Authority.

[Anonymous No.56102571]

It seems you faggots forgot, Chainlink is a NIGGER HATING coin, a CHINK KILLER coin, and a based LOLI LOVING coin.

As fucking if Sergey would fraternize with these fucking BUG MEN. Link started on /biz/ because it was a majority white board, white men who understand the difference between child rape and child LOVE.

Fucking gooks aren’t going to use it. They’re not allowed to use it

[Anonymous No.56102596]

>>56102442
>they changed the tokenomics from the original whitepaper
what

>People don't buy because they overpromised in 2020-2022
People were buying tons, Link kept trying to pump and break out, but Bitcoin smacked everything down.
Keep in mind that 2020-2022 was when Chainlink took over Defi, there was huge adoption news all the time.

[Anonymous No.56102607]

>>56102596
if you're not an OG dont even talk to me man...

[Anonymous No.56102611]

>>56102607
Please tell me how they changed the tokenomics from the whitepaper.
I'm begging you.

[Anonymous No.56102624]

>>56102611
Probably referring to superlinear staking

[Anonymous No.56102629]

>>56102183
Je zit in Leiden of niet, flikkertje

[Anonymous No.56102641]

>>56102624
If he is, that's not a change at all.

[Anonymous No.56102649]

>>56102611
fine, because you were respectful enough

In the original version nodes could stake LINK and the staked LINK for a wrong price would be slashed and paid out to compensate the loss of the false report. It was envisioned as the majority of staked nodes seeing the wrong report and slashing the wrong node, LINK goes to the wronged oracle user

In the new vision of WP2.0, they have something called superlinear staking. Here the LINK goes to whichever single node raises an alert, and all the LINK of all the wrongful nodes is used to pay out the alerter. Therefore bribing is exponentially harder than a simple majority bribe. However the mechanism for detecting if a price report was actually wrong has changed from majority stake vote to something they left vague and open (Dapp vote, some slower process, whatever).

The vision now is not so much to compensate the oracle user but simply to prevent a false report entirely by making it prohibitively expensive.

A consequence of this is that they are still stuck in limbo with what to do if an alert is raised, who is allowed to alert, etc. They also introduced a tiered system of DONs where neet nodes (if ever introduced) will not carry the same weight as centralized, KYC nodes.

Most importantly, due to superlinear staking, the amount of LINK needed to secure a certain amount of money has decreased drastically, meaning projected price of the token has decreased with it. So now they're tagging on extra use with CCIP gas, some weird form of community pool staking (which is a closed pool), and other band-aids.

This is a far cry from the original vision and any decent OG will see that.

[Anonymous No.56102652]

>>56102629
>impressible
Eerder Zoetermeer, waarschijnlijk mbo maatje van Adem.

[Anonymous No.56102685]

>>56102649
The original WP says nothing about where the slashed stake goes.
It also says nothing about how incorrect price reports are detected.

It's all clearly stated to be configurable by the users.

[Anonymous No.56102706]

>>56102649
Yeah about that alerter tier. They reached out to dapps, namely Uniswap and aave, and couldn't make it work. So yeah now they're stuck with this system that nobody wants and that wouldn't be really decentralised and trustless anyway. All that just because they got bullied by Eric Wall about their original plan

[Anonymous No.56102715]

>>56102706
lmao, nice headcanon Eric.

[Anonymous No.56102725]

>>56102086
one scam after another

[Anonymous No.56102746]

>>56102685
that's odd, I just downloaded the original WP again and it says nothing about staking at all. Did they edit it or something? Because we were discussing this from the start yet now I can't find it anywhere in the wp.

[Anonymous No.56102749]

>>56102706
I remember that fateful Zoom call. Ari's screams as Eric Wall gave him the chinese arm burn of the century really stuck with me. Shit like that man you never forget it.

[Anonymous No.56102750]

>>56102269
Because neither the shills nor the fuddies want that. Far too much shit flinging for a single general.

[Anonymous No.56102764]

>>56102649
>due to superlinear staking, the amount of LINK needed to secure a certain amount of money has decreased drastically
No, it hasn't.
In the extreme event that all but one nodes are colluding, then that one honest node gets everything and the staked amounts return an extreme reward for that one node.
But this is the absolute extreme case. The vast majority of failures/attacks will involve one or a few nodes.
In which case the staked amounts still need to be high.

And even in the case of all but one nodes colluding, the point of staking is not just to reward honesty, but to punish dishonesty.
For that reason alone the stake still has to be high.

[Anonymous No.56102779]

>>56102764
but this just relegates all security to the voting after an alert is raised.
no minority of votes will give a wrong report if there is no doubt that the vote afterwards will have them lose. They will either go for a majority to seriously skew the pushed price, or not bother at all.

and if the vote process after an alert can be manipulated then the amount staked matters nothing at all.

[Anonymous No.56102780]

>>56102746
The word staking was never in the original whitepaper. The concept was, but under the wording "penalty".

Isn't is funny how you try to claim they changed the tokenomics from the original whitepaper, but you have no idea what it even says.
Even funnier that you claimed to be an OG.

[Anonymous No.56102789]

>>56102779
>no minority of votes will give a wrong report if there is no doubt that the vote afterwards will have them lose.
Superlinear staking applies all the more if the MAJORITY of nodes give a wrong report.

[Anonymous No.56102794]

superlinear staking, on the one hand, makes the entire cl ecosystem proposition much more secure, attractive and viable.
It will post white paper 2, at least much more feasibly than previously, capture much more value than before and, theoretically, all things being equal, it will all flow (gas_fee_converted to link) with the link token.

On the other hand, however, without the original concept of 'collateralised staking' as most og's understood it the value capture (cl token price) was pushed further back.

[Anonymous No.56102801]

>>56102794
>without the original concept of 'collateralised staking' as most og's understood it the value capture (cl token price) was pushed further back
You're making exactly zero sense.

[Anonymous No.56102831]

>>56102780
I am, it's been years since I read it and it would be the same for you if you were
>>56102789
yeah but the point of your argument is that token value need not decrease because a minority might make an attempt

[Anonymous No.56102835]

anon although i definitely could have used sharper language, maybe you're choosing to be difficult.

Not looking for issues pal, so will try again to get across what i was trying to say before.

We, or at least I and I dare say a few others on whose behalf i'm willing to write, originally understood the staking system to be one thing. Then super-linear staking, and a grander CL ecosystem vision, came out and it changed the value capture proposition considerably.
Although it made the potential value capture significantly greater it also pushed it further back (with regards to time) and pushed it down (with regards to price).
Nevertheless, the value capture (getting everyone hooked then charging the junkie the fee analogy) is real regardless.

[Anonymous No.56102849]

>>56102831
>the point of your argument is that token value need not decrease because a minority might make an attempt
It's time for you to stop posting.

>>56102835
>i definitely could have used sharper language
You're fundamentally completely wrong.

[Anonymous No.56102869]

>>56102780
right, so reading the penalty payments section it's exactly as I said. It was initially meant to be paid out to users for violating SLA

[Anonymous No.56102875]

>>56102869
>It was initially meant to be paid out to users
Post a direct quote

[Anonymous No.56102876]

>September 11, 2020:
>LINK: $12.64
>MATIC: $0.02
>SOL: $3.41
>ETH: $387.11
>BTC: $10,325
>DOGE: $0.002
>NVDA: $121.65

>September 11, 2023:
>LINK: $5.98
>MATIC: $0.52
>SOL: $18.25
>ETH: $1609.70
>BTC: $25,741
>DOGE: $0.06
>NVDA: $455.72

how this make you feel?

[Anonymous No.56102877]

>>56102849
>It's time for you to stop posting.
I will since it seems you've ran out of interesting arguments.

[Anonymous No.56102888]

fundamentally wrong about being able to use sharper language?
ok.

or fundamentally wrong about the CL value capture changing after super-linear staking was introduced?

Because if it's the former, cool, while if it's the latter, then i'm happy as it means the price is more positively correlated with the staking feature (ps. where and when can i apply to run a node ? waiting and waiting here) and less correlated with the adjoining features of the cl ecosystem.

Provided you're saying i'm fundamentally wrong about how white paper 2 proposed super-linear staking has changed how the cl token accrues value, care to explain it then? Mean it sincerely and in good faith.

[Anonymous No.56102896]

>>56102159
Based

[Anonymous No.56102904]

>>56102888
Nothing changed about the possible staking requirements from wp1 to wp2.
Quadratic staking in no way reduces it.

[Anonymous No.56102905]

>>56102269
there is, it's /biz/

[Anonymous No.56102914]

>>56102086
It is mathematically impossible for Chainlink to stay under $1000 after 12/31/2023 11:59:59.
Trust me, I did the math.

[Anonymous No.56102916]

>>56102877
After you post a direct quote for >>56102869

[Anonymous No.56103039]

>>56102641
Kek I knew it was going to be superlinear staking and i knew that was the argument he was going to propose. It’s all so tiresome

[Anonymous No.56103040]

anon, ''even when nodes stake only moderate amounts'' .... implication here is what i was getting at earlier.

Care to explain to me otherwise? (how super-linear staking has NOT changed the value capture proposition of cl)

[Anonymous No.56103082]

>>56103040
That section applies specifically to "a general attacker with a budget super-linear in n".
i.e. an attacker who can bribe all nodes in a non-superlinear system.

In other words, this applies only to the extreme case of all but one nodes colluding.

[Anonymous No.56103084]

>>56103040
>This is already a high bar as the attacker has to have a liquid budget on the order of the combined deposits of all stakers in the network. Our goal is a still stronger degree of economic security than this already substantial hurdle.

Case closed.

[Anonymous No.56103094]

>>56103040
number up or down ?

[Anonymous No.56103188]

>>56102835
>Although it made the potential value capture significantly greater it also pushed it further back (with regards to time) and pushed it down (with regards to price).
>>56102849

Don't know about the value, but definitely this multi tier system that needs votes from other dapps pushed down the whole thing in terms of time. We could have nodes alerting and slashing by now, but instead they need to convince dapps to integrate this thing into their governance. Also a bit worried of how secure this will make the network when you realise these apps governance are always skewed by one or two big wallets. Starting to think Eric wasn't that wrong really

[Anonymous No.56103288]

>>56103188
>Starting to think Eric wasn't that wrong
hi, Eric

Nobody's even saying the second tier has to be dapps.

[Anonymous No.56103344]

>>56102888
>Because if it's the former, cool, while if it's the latter, then i'm happy as it means the price is more positively correlated with the staking feature (ps. where and when can i apply to run a node ? waiting and waiting here) and less correlated with the adjoining features of the cl ecosystem.
checked. you can run a node now just need to kyc it after proving you can on test net

[Anonymous No.56103364]

>>56102596
>People were buying tons,
only people that were buying was anons here on /biz/. Retail(which is reddit faggots) never bought because they dont see what value the token captures for the past seven years.

[Anonymous No.56103444]

>>56102086
Stop posting misinformation. This is anti-Semtitic

[Anonymous No.56103455]

>>56103364
Volume is consitently high on Link, you're dreaming if you think it's all /biz/

[Anonymous No.56103461]

>>56102242
Super linear staking would imply if Chainlink was securing $16 trillion, the LINK price would be approximately $81,000

[Anonymous No.56103493]

>>56103455
>only people that were
>were buying
as in past tense. general consensu on twitter (which is retail) their is no reason to buy the token right now because there is no upside other then the hope of something happening in the future and a closed pool for staking. You cant farm with it, there are no air drops with it, there is no upside to holding it.The projecets that sergey decided to associate himself with rugged.

[Anonymous No.56103505]

>>56103493
ok, you're dreaming if /biz/ were the only people buying

[Anonymous No.56103514]

>>56103505
at the time we were. I dont think you were around back then

[Anonymous No.56103583]

>>56102876
LINK has inflationary tokenomics and the foundation constantly dumps on retail. I don't see why this is so hard for biztards to understand.

[Anonymous No.56103585]

>>56103514
Yes anon, /biz/ was the one trading $1.5 billion worth of Link on a daily basis.

[Anonymous No.56103638]

>>56103583
All of those coins he listed are inflationary (except NVDA).

[Anonymous No.56103704]

>>56103583
>LINK has inflationary tokenomics
lol

>and the foundation constantly dumps on retail
Solana and Matic dumped waaaaaay more on retail than Sergey.

[Anonymous No.56103712]

>>56103704
so then chainlink is a shitcoin?

[Anonymous No.56103724]

>>56103712
Why would it be a shitcoin?

[Anonymous No.56103869]

>>56103514
From sept 2017- may 2019 only biz was buying. After that more retail got involved

[Anonymous No.56104562]

>>56102877
Yeah shut the fuck up. There’s no way you’re an og kek
>people aren’t buying!
There are literally arrivals saying whales are giggling up supply you goof
>>56103514
>>56103493
>biz is responsible for billions of worth of volume
Are you pretending to be retarded? You better be

[Anonymous No.56104594]

>>56102877 #
Yeah shut the fuck up. There’s no way you’re an og kek
>people aren’t buying!
There are literally articles saying whales are gobbling up supply you goof
>>56103514 #
>>56103493 #
>biz is responsible for billions of worth of volume
Are you pretending to be retarded? You better be

[Anonymous No.56104605]

>>56103712
Ok yeah you’re just a retard

[Anonymous No.56104839]

>$6
Kek baggies
TOKEN NOT NEEDED

[Anonymous No.56104863]

>>56102571
Cope you are personally paying for WFH african devs and diversity blockchain initiatives

[Anonymous No.56104900]

Zachary at it again with 30pbtid ITT

[Anonymous No.56105510]

>>56103724
>>56104605
why is it being compared to other projects then? When someone brings up token dumps you guys are the ones who bring up shitcoins.

[Anonymous No.56105679]

>>56105510
Every project has token emission. Even most stocks get diluted over time. This doesn't seem to impede the line going up.

[Anonymous No.56105728]

>>56105679
i just think its funny how anon and CLG and Fishy faggot like and pick and choose arguments. If chainlink is doing the same as a shitcoin project then chainlink is a shitcoin project too

[Anonymous No.56105734]

>>56105728
How so? If I swim am I fish? What the fuck is this reasoning.

[Anonymous No.56105761]

>>56105734
stop bringing up other projects to compare when its convenient to win an argument and look cool online

[Anonymous No.56105779]

>>56105761
Are you that upset that you're losing arguments online anon? Just close the thread lmao we don't have accounts here

[Anonymous No.56105854]

>>56105779
i go out of my way to dispel what ever that stupid faggot fishy faggot disseminates. i hate the mother fucker with a passion

[Anonymous No.56106063]

BUT MY KEKOLD ADDICTION NOOOOOOOOOO! I CANT JERK OFF IF LINK HITS $1,000