/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.56441517]

FT wrote an article on Chainlink, boomers seething in comment section

https://www.ft.com/content/d0447dcd-9aa5-4f71-9919-5061e77772d5#comments-anchor

[Anonymous No.56441608]

>>56441517
you weren't lying lmao, they are so confused :(

[Anonymous No.56441609]

>>56441517

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email [e-mail] to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour..
https://www.ft.com/content/d0447dcd-9aa5-4f71-9919-5061e77772d5#comments-anchor

I must have missed the compelling reasons to adopt blockchain in the article. As usual it's a discussion of blockchain's technical features, none of which are compelling, with nothing about any attractive business features. Are there any?

Blockchain's appalling performance characteristics versus the figures for relational databases verified by the Transaction Processing Council are already well known.

If every blockchain system exists in its own silo, each one requiring massive amounts of computing power and energy consumption, then how, if ever, will transactional security across multiple systems be implemented? Is a blockchain equivalent of relational's XA protocol being developed? If so how will that effect blockchain's performance?

Blockchain systems are low volume systems requiring excessive resources and thus are completely antithetical to the needs of the modern world.
holy shit if i was sergey and i had to deal with people like this i would blow my brains out. the man is a saint

[Anonymous No.56441623]

>FT wrote an article on Chainlink
let me fix that for you.....
>Sergey paid FT to write an article on Chainlink

[Anonymous No.56441627]

>i know more than swift and the big banks
Kek

[Anonymous No.56441635]

>>56441517
>I must have missed the compelling reasons to adopt blockchain in the article. As usual it's a discussion of blockchain's technical features, none of which are compelling, with nothing about any attractive business features. Are there any?

Blockchain's appalling performance characteristics versus the figures for relational databases verified by the Transaction Processing Council are already well known.

If every blockchain system exists in its own silo, each one requiring massive amounts of computing power and energy consumption, then how, if ever, will transactional security across multiple systems be implemented? Is a blockchain equivalent of relational's XA protocol being developed? If so how will that effect blockchain's performance?

Blockchain systems are low volume systems requiring excessive resources and thus are completely antithetical to the needs of the modern world.
holy shit if i was sergey and had to deal with people like this on daily basis i would blow my brains out. the man is a saint

[Anonymous No.56441673]

Boomers are seething about younger generations not wanting to join the military to defend Israel, they are clearly very upset this month

[Anonymous No.56441712]

>>56441517
What's the jewsplanation for this? It's a non-retail cbdc, yeah?

[Anonymous No.56441736]

That's nice and all but Tron and Sol have been pumping like crazy on no news while Link needs all the (((newspapers))) talking about it to have any effect on the price.
Sounds bearish to me.

[Anonymous No.56441815]

>>56441712
Citi has been name dropping Chainlink for years, Citi is the entity that said outright Chainlink could become worth more than Bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.56441846]

>>56441815
>Citi
>some dude that works for citi

[Anonymous No.56441852]

>>56441712
You could see it that way, the idea that all banks will have their own blockchains internally that can communicate with each other using CCIP. This will replace SWIFT in the coming decade.

[Anonymous No.56441914]

>>56441846
yea dude citi isn't some conscious being that endorses things. fucking nincompoop

[Anonymous No.56441930]

>>56441846
Yeah some dude that writes their publicly available research disclosures which all of their execs and partners read

[Anonymous No.56441937]

Kek this guy knows about the oracle problem but doesnt know about chainlink. What is boils down to is these guys hate change, but change is inevitable

[Anonymous No.56441967]

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email [e-mail] to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour..
https://www.ft.com/content/d0447dcd-9aa5-4f71-9919-5061e77772d5#comments-anchor

Blockchain has been proven to not be totally secure. It is a fallacy to believe so. Something that is encrypted is not the same as something being authenticated. One example is the hugh amount of ‘thief’ ’of’ bitcoins. The systems attached to blockchain allow for penetration into the core system.. You also have the issue of garbage in, garbage out - who controls the original input. This is one reason why blockchain for art purchases has not worked. No system can ever be 100 pct secure.

[Anonymous No.56441996]

>>56441937
holy fuck
we're gonna be so fucking rich

[Anonymous No.56442061]

holy based

[Anonymous No.56442066]

boomers are so fucking stupid its unreal lmao

[Anonymous No.56442102]

>>56441736
link pumped 30% on zero news before this article came out

[Anonymous No.56442121]

>>56442061
You wrote that yourself, didn't you anon?

[Anonymous No.56442154]

Nothing to do with Chainlink.

[Anonymous No.56442186]

>>56441517
why do these comments remind me so much of reddit?

[Anonymous No.56442190]

>>56442154
>disabled comments

[Anonymous No.56442201]

>>56442186
most "humans" are NPC/Hylic/Niggercattle

[Anonymous No.56442246]

>>56442154
It's not explicitly about Link but it's the only crypto mentioned and described by name

[Anonymous No.56442278]

Not one of them understands why two parties would want a fully auditable, trustless transaction with conditions that neither can worm their way out of by kowtowing to the bigger (((third party))) taking their own cut to ensure trust. Without getting into programmability and edge cases that come about from introducing trustless transactions into scenarios that aren't lucrative enough to pay for trust. Fucking sad. I'm glad this is going to sail right past boomerville and shit countries like Canada.

[Anonymous No.56442295]

>>56442186
it's that smug condescending aura while simultaneously being completely wrong

[Anonymous No.56442357]

>>56441623
This aint quant son

[Anonymous No.56442373]

>>56442201
>it isn't about link
>link is the only name dropped

[Anonymous No.56442375]

>ctrl+f chainlink
>4 results

holy shit

[Anonymous No.56442480]

>>56441852
SWIFT is integrating CCIP into its platform you ding dong. They've been working with Chainlink before the project was officially called Chainlink.

[Anonymous No.56442482]

>>56442061
yeah you "owned" them but now what? The Link community's decision to be as arrogant as possible never made any sense, and has certainly cost everyone money. You should be less defensive. You're already loaded up so why not be patient and sell this to others? We're all here to make money

[Anonymous No.56442503]

>>56442482
What are you talking about? Do you really think the attitude of linkies or retail money matters for the success of Link? Go drink some boiling water dumbass

[Anonymous No.56442505]

>>56442154
These fags are so cringe trying to ride the coattails of LINK

[Anonymous No.56442511]

>2015 called

[Anonymous No.56442524]

>>56442154
lol

[Anonymous No.56442530]

>>56441937
>hugh amount 'of' 'thief' of Bitcoin
>penetration into the core system
holy shit and you just know this guy has a respectable position in some company where he thinks he knows everything

[Anonymous No.56442564]

>>56442530
every one of you should be making FT accounts as "C-Suite Execs" and commenting on this to outweigh the jeets and 85 year olds who bought the top and sold the bottom 10 years in a row

[Anonymous No.56442566]

>>56442503
calm down

>Do you really think the attitude of linkies or retail money matters for the success of Link

For the success of it, certainly not. I'm talking about price going up. If you don't think Link could have at least done another 2x in '21 had plebbit not been fudded out then you're delusional. Assuming you've been here for years, your cost basis is substantially lower than current price, so why the smug attitude towards normie retail? You should be spoonfeeding them.

[Anonymous No.56442572]

>>56441846
>some dude that works for citi
Shall i arrange to have every staff member chant it simultaneously all around the world?

[Anonymous No.56442614]

>>56442564
kek I made one saying I'm CEO in insurance in the space and defense sector

[Anonymous No.56442621]

>>56441517
Kek the sheer amount of "I know what's what" on display here is just beautiful

[Anonymous No.56442628]

>>56441996
lol this - it's so mind boggling how in the dark everyone is on this stuff. imagine the cope when it suddenly dawns on them what they've missed

[Anonymous No.56442648]

Yes, how will blockchains ever be connected?
If only we had the technology...

[Anonymous No.56442667]

>>56442648
>>56441937

I love these criticisms these guys are making

[Anonymous No.56442772]

>>56442648
>>56442667
Its like they did some research in maybe 2015 and still think the industry hasn't changed at all.

[Anonymous No.56442796]

>>56442566
shut up reddit spacing jeet, do not speak to me

[Anonymous No.56442824]

>>56442796
You

are

a

tool

[Anonymous No.56442881]

>>56442824
I have more Link than you, a higher IQ, and a hotter girlfriend. I have no doubt I am more talented and gifted than you in every measurable regard. Now go post some more on twitter, newfag.

[Anonymous No.56442901]

>>56441914
>>56441930
cope.

>>56442572
yes that would suffice.

[Anonymous No.56442912]

>>56441635
You ain't lying. You can tell he's to the point where he doesn't need to deal with the plebs anymore. He already won. He's just so fucking nice he barely does a smirk or look away and roll his eyes in an interview. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.56442984]

>>56441937
>Blockchains aren’t designed to allow my wallet to be overdrafted from a forgotten planet fitness membership because it requires gas to withdraw in the first place and I have to sign for the transaction.

>nothing is 100 percent secure so I’m trusting the majority of my income in a system where since 1976 every 10 years there is a financial crisis.

>Y-y-you can just attack the core of the blockchain with garbage-in-garbage-out. So then just like every other major banking institution there has been some form of data breach.

[Anonymous No.56443111]

>>56442984
>reddit spacing greentext
holy shit I fucking hate you people

[Anonymous No.56443191]

>>56441635
Transfer the value and instruction in one transaction.

That is the value. No middlemen.

But you know this. Fud was funny in 2017, now you just look stupid. Or maybe you are stupid?

[Anonymous No.56443192]

>>56442295
Would you rather be right or be rich? This question lives in my head rent free. I will make fun of link and Bitcoin regularly but I still hold them and have made a fuckload of money by doing such. Normies just don't get it. The risk:return is so outlandishly in your favor holding crypto and normies just will never get it.

[Anonymous No.56443224]

>>56442482
>please be nice to others mmhkay
go back

[Anonymous No.56443297]

>ctrl+f chainlink
>no results found

[Anonymous No.56443335]

>>56441712
banks will create their own stablecoin

[Anonymous No.56443359]

>>56442984
>nothing is 100 percent secure so I’m trusting the majority of my income in a system where since 1976 every 10 years there is a financial crisis.
FT readers and commentors are working in finance so yeah they dont want to be disrupted

[Anonymous No.56443399]

All niggers please fuck off back to Twitter

[Anonymous No.56443453]

>>56442566
Agreed, loser incel autists need to feel like they are in a special club and pwning teh heccin normies like that rice cell yearbook picture where the faggot gook says “it’s not enough I succeed others must fail”. It’s a loser mentality as most that browse here are in fact losers and project their buck broken mentality. We 100% should be shilling and spoon feeding normies at this point. If we stay above 10 dollars for a few weeks this board really should consider ways to get normies to be buying our bags sooner rather than later.

[Anonymous No.56443461]

>>56441517
>FT wrote an article on Chainlink,
Just sold everything, thanks

[Anonymous No.56443466]

>>56443453
>t. retard newfag who can't afford 10k link
UH OH GUYS! HOW WILL LINK MAKE IT WITHOUT THE REDDIT MONEY???

[Anonymous No.56443467]

>>56442648
If only we could...link...the chains...

[Anonymous No.56443470]

>>56441712
yes cbdcs still look years off
this is banks building their own chains
you will have thousands of different chains
different markets, different use cases
>“Every bank I talk to is making their own chains. If those chains aren’t connected, you don’t have liquidity, you don’t have access to the other counterparties that have their own chains. It’s a very fundamental problem that’s inescapable.”
https://chainlinktoday.com/sergey-nazarov-delivers-sibos-keynote-on-building-the-future-of-digital-assets-with-chainlink-ccip/

[Anonymous No.56443477]

>>56441967
Good catch. Mods are slow today

[Anonymous No.56443485]

>>56441517
Man these boomers are so annoying. Its literally them commenting on an internet website when probably the same people said 25 years ago the internet is some hyped up bullshit hype that will die soon.

[Anonymous No.56443502]

>>56443485
those same old people pay geeks quad $200 to connect their printer to their computer

[Anonymous No.56443503]

>>56442648
this retard thinks all blockchains are PoW like bitcoin

[Anonymous No.56443533]

>>56443485
until thought leaders they them what to think they don't see anything

[Anonymous No.56443545]

>>56443533
same for blockchains as with internet

[Anonymous No.56443584]

>>56443191
He fucked up his green texting but he's posting comments

[Anonymous No.56443687]

>>56443111
Checked

[Anonymous No.56443808]

>>56441517
Nice!

[Anonymous No.56443815]

>>56441517
sergey dumped on y'all to pay for this article

[Anonymous No.56443857]

>>56443192
>"the only people who make money in crypto are the scammers and insiders"
>"even if you make money you can't even cash out"
>"even if you make money you can just get hacked and lose it all"
>"even if you make money you make 1 small mistake and you'll lose it all, like getting phished or entering a wallet address wrong"
>"making money in crypto is immoral because it's a zero sum game, you're taking someone else's money"
nocoiners have come up with plenty of ways to cope with missing out. to them any normal person who makes money off crypto just got extremely lucky.

[Anonymous No.56443990]

>>56443466
I have a 5 figure stack I’ve been holding since 2018 you retarded nigger. The fud doesn’t even serve a purpose anymore besides make losers feel like they belong to le legion sekret hack3r club. It’s mostly porn addict losers like Thomas still fudding religiously anyways, it’s a weird mental illness.

[Anonymous No.56444549]

>>56442881
How much Link do you think, Mr Pink?

[Anonymous No.56444732]

>>56441712
so does this means banks will use link to trade their cbdcs?

[Anonymous No.56444951]

is 2.5k enough bros?

[Anonymous No.56444999]

Behead boomers

[Anonymous No.56445023]

>>56441517
>David Gerard
That's probably this dude: https://davidgerard.co.uk/

From what I can remember he's one of those lefty grifters with a weird anti-crypto obsession that has even written a few anti-crypto books and has made himself a sort of low-life career out of larping as an "expert" whenever lefty papers like the Guardian need someone to play that role for some lazy anti-crypto hitpiece.

Judging from his blog, he's now even trying to be a sorta anti-AI grifter too ("AI is the new NFT!"). Kinda sad really.

[Anonymous No.56445091]

>>56444732
banks aren't central banks (cb)
see anz's a$dc

[Anonymous No.56445138]

>>56441517
Lmao those comments are pure r/buttcoin boomer brain

[Anonymous No.56445213]

Listen up, I'm a tcp ip developer at a fortune 50 big data company with 25 years experience in database infosec, I've looked into chainlink and all I can tell you if that the cryptographic measures implemented in regards to the decentralized security paradigm in the API and IoT structure of chainlink's github code is fundamentally flawed after the Pivotal tracker server crashed due to the core attacks on the network enabled by its corrupt data inputs and outputs, what this really means is that by attempting to solve the oracle sybil resistance issue it instead allows customers to bypass the encrypted hardware and even hack into the smart contract Intel SGX mainframe, unless they manage to increase the signatures and scalable nodes, which isn't likely considering the Google backend isn't compatible with the legacy JSON systems and Solidity language from the EVM in the Truffle stacks, that's why the ic3 and SWIFT engineering teams developed the ISO 20220 standards but it's centralized and susceptible to the 51% front running program so yeah basically Sergey didn't foresee that the enterprise customers and cloud blockchain dapps would never allow their protocols to rely on these permissioned host mechanisms thus rendering the LINK ERC 677 token obsolete and no serious developer would consider DLT technology in these conditions, sorry linkies I'm just telling it how it is.

[Anonymous No.56445396]

>Another puff-piece to humor FT crypto accounts. There is no such thing as 100% secure software, except in the minds of captive promoters and hungry programmers.

they don't know what they don't know

[Anonymous No.56445746]

LMAO

[Anonymous No.56446144]

>>56441712
could be retail too, look up "deposit tokenization". Seems to be the middle road that's not a private stablecoin, but nor is it a CBDC. More of a privately issued but legitimate and trusted stablecoin. Combine that with Proof of Reserves and there's no reason Wells Fargo wouldn't accept a tokenized Citibank deposit as collateral/payment for whatever they're offering on their own chain

[Anonymous No.56446205]

>>56441517
The comments section is gold
They're so close yet so far away and blind
Easily the best thread one biz today, thanks op

[Anonymous No.56446206]

>>56442648
tfw were still a decade early

[Anonymous No.56446214]

>>56443857
> "even if you make money you can just get hacked and lose it all"
True only if you have poor opsec.

[Anonymous No.56446254]

>>56444951
Double suicide stack. So no. Full disclosure, I have 2,500 too. And I'm shitting myself for not buying enough. Oh well. At least I'm in.

[Anonymous No.56446434]

>>56446254
Unironically just wait 10 years

[Anonymous No.56446458]

>>56446254
Be baggies for two more bull cycles. Got it.

[Anonymous No.56446616]

What if we're wrong, and intellectual Goliaths like this guy are right?

[Anonymous No.56446633]

>>56446616
Basedo LPL chad kiddo how ya doing based kiddo???

[Anonymous No.56446637]

>>56446616
Then I'm a monkey's uncle

[Anonymous No.56446680]

>>56446633
Based LPL kiddo ya doing now how ?
Great job riling up these No-Pooler cattle KEK

[Anonymous No.56446712]

>>56446680
BASED KEK WORSHIPPING CHAD KING

NOPOOLER SCUM WILL LITERALLY YEET THEMSELVES FROM THE SEVENTH FLOOR AFTER THEY FIGURE IT OUT HAHAHA

!!!

ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US