I know something you don't know

>Ctrl+f

How is this not related?

Swift and most banks are going with private ledger and private blockchain type of solution (No need for public decentralzed network) and AUS government now going for Overledger type of solution Could you explain where do you see Chainlink entering these systems?

pretty much this

Look at cases where data is needed from EXternal sources where Links public chain then is needed.

Smartcontract made a poc for Swift. This poc included a "smart oracle" to pull data for bonds. There was never a commitment for decentralized oracles or any blockchain main net. If you are a chainlink holder you need to hope these companies start using chainlink in a private permissioned setting and slowly crossover over the years. 2020 your chainlink node will be providing sports scores to simple betting smart contracts and similar. No legitimate bank or financial comp. using decentralized oracles in 2020. But don't get too down, run your node and collect the "node incentive" stash like a little cuck you are. This will at least keep you from wanting to shut your node off for lack of usage and maybe postbone your inevitable suicide.

The goals are completely different you moron get the fuck outta here who pays you for this shit

Trying this hard.

Another shit thread that got shitted on by shills and link fud boys from the discord lmfao

I am not FUDding here, please explain at what point you see Chainlink entering these fintech institutions considering the following:
Where is your public token network is needed in these cases?

Who pays you to do this lol

The thread was started by OP who said ISO 20022 will be a huge thing for Chainlink, which is not the case.

Just like the AWS Kaleido news, which mentioned Chainlink, is not huge news for people who own LINK TOKENS because those services are not currently using Chainlink decentralized public network.

Good news for Chainlink the Company ®™

Bad news for the stupid fucking Eoy $1000 link bagholder NEET nodes

Ree why is the logo incorrectly oriented

I don't believe this poster is fudding. Some people hate hearing reality checks or having opposing perspectives.

We know that digital asset and SWIFT are fans of hyperledger, hyperledger provides permissioned blockchains. You won't see the bonds market settling using chainlink on a public network - you may see it operate in a private network.

What you will likely see are institutions like SWIFT providing their data to the wider market via the public network using CL adapters to bridge data between the permissioned chain with the public chain.

You need to hope that fintechs will be using blockchain and willing to pull this data from SWIFT / Reuters etc using CL.

What part of you do not understand about Permissioned blockchains?

There is no need for whole purpose of decentralization. Swift, among with other banks, will be using their own permissioned and private Blockchains as the most recent news agree with. See: Chainlink in a permissioned environment defets the purpose of utilizing the mainnet because they have almost zero incentive to do so for reputation.

If a permissioned blockchain is using Chainlink for the technology inside a private blockchain, they have no need for your LINK tokens.

>postbone
You might've had something going for the mentally challenged but this totally gave you away.

>We know that digital asset and SWIFT are fans of hyperledger, hyperledger provides permissioned blockchains. You won't see the bonds market settling using chainlink on a public network - you may see it operate in a private network.

Chainlink nodes running directly on a permissioned blockchain can only be utilized within that blockchain.

Private or permissioned blockchains do not use public coins or tokens to function. They do not even need the reputation system. Because of that, these Chainlink nodes in a permissioned chain cannot receive payment for their work. (Just like Jannies, they do it for FREE!)

Public blockchains allow two or more parties that don't know each other (a requester and a single or many Chainlink nodes) to work with one another in order get external data to the blockchain. In this way, the requester can pay for data, and the node operator(s) get paid for fulfilling the request. This occurs on public blockchains where parties do not necessarily know, or need to know, each other.

What we want, since we're building the oracle software as well as the network, is usage. Permissioned blockchains using Chainlink as their oracle won't have to pay a dime (That means no money foor neets! )

How is this possible to make the calls to the LINK network then? How do you get data without paying for it? Is this just a centralized oracle that Chainlink provides to the permissioned network? Completely by passing the public LINK token?

The CL network is just a bunch of nodes running ontop of the ethereum ledger.
If you have a private ethereum (or similar chain) ledger you can spin up your own CL nodes and call your own data or call data from other people on your private network.

You can connect between the private and public networks with adapters but that likely isn't a use case at this stage for swift.

You still have to use a token on other networks (like the testnets).

In the case of iso 20022 which is a
>ISO 20022 is an ISO standard for electronic data interchange between financial institutions.

This is the theme of the thread.

The companies, or banks in this case, financial institutions, among with Swift, are going to use a private chain. These banks already know each other and can see who is responsible for mistakes or attacks in the network. The Bank of America wont be attacking/sabotaging The Bank of England during any phase of the contract or transfer.

If each party sets up a chainlink node, you have a network of chainlink nodes. These nodes are used by the private chain to fetch off chain data.

They only reason they would use other chainlink nodes for fetching data is when they don't trust each other. But they do, at least to some degree.

This is the problem posters like these don't seem to get

all you faggot fudders answer me this

how do you expect all of these banks and private blockchains to share their data with eachother trustlessly?

This is like saying how can you trust your own Bank because they can close your account or transfer it to somewhere else?

I know people who use cash only because of these trust issues, but majority of the population, does not even think about such trust issues.

you didn't answer my question, shitskin

I know, it gets on my tits so much. Even the basic hexagon logo isn't aligned properly - the centre hexagon is a TINY bit to the right. Have a look.

Don't entertain this buffoon.

Hey retard, JP Morgan's IIN was launched in 2017 and is separate from this new SWIFT API pilot.
jpmorgan.com/country/US/en/detail/1320562088910

L2Read your own source:
Inefficiencies, however, have left the platform ripe for competition from payments start-ups such as Revolut and TransferWise, as well as the Interbank Information Network (IIN). More than 130 banks, led by JPMorgan Chase, have signed on to the blockchain-based IIN project, which shares information between banks on a mutual distributed ledger. That allows them to quickly resolve errors and compliance issues that can delay payments by weeks.

>>In a testament to how banks are hedging their bets on the future of payments, several of those banks are now part of a pilot for Swift’s own fix for lengthy payment delays — — a new “prevalidation” system in which banks use an application programming interface (API) to access each other’s data to check things such as the validity of bank account numbers when a payment is initiated.

Attached: a0ba1fb5-72b2-41f8-9db3-997d56270a2e.jpg (1056x1320, 161K)

This.
Reminder that anyone who has this much interest in Chainlink has a stack MUCH bigger than yours.

If they provide unique data, somebody has to trust them to report it accurately, regardless of how 'trustless' the delivery mechanism is. Do you think there is ANY winning scenario where a bank (whose entire business depends on honest accounting) reports inaccurate data to make out better on a few big contracts?
Do you really think that banks need completely trustless delivery of information?

>hasn't read the whitepaper
2/10 fud

What if a subset of the banks involved collude to make a fraudulent fork and they claim that's the real chain? What if majority of larger banks did this to fuck over the smaller ones with less resources to dedicate toward litigation? Or just sidestep this scenario by forcing everyone in the banking network to use public Ethereum CL nodes to parse off chain data.

is correct. Having a permissioned ledger defeats the trustless input/output of chainlink.

Basically, if you have a smart contract on the public ethereum blockchain, then your smart contract logic and execution tamper-proof, but someone can fuck with it by tampering with the inputs/outputs, by shutting down / mounting a DoS attack or by modifying the input/output data.

Signing the data or doing some cryptographic shit like oraclize is fine for preventing inout/output data modification, but chainlink goes a step further by preventing DoS attacks (and some other stuff that's nice to have, but DoS is the crucial benefit).

If you trust that the bank of England isn't going to shut down their input/output when dealing with contracts relevant to the bank of England, then there's little point of the public link network.

Think about it this way:

A public ledger has trustless contract execution and so it needs trustless input/output. Using trusted input/output defeats the purpose of using a public ledger.

It also goes the other way:
The trustless input/output of the public chainlink network is wasted if you use a permissioned ledger, since the participants already have some level of trust.

>they still cling on a 2017 erc shitcoin pump
it's over guys, jesus fuck, just let it go, it will never be worth more then 0.4$ again

Yeah, so guess what? They already accepted those risks when they chose to use a permissioned ledger.

They're boomer grandparents who don't understand.

They're people who unironically think "(permissioned) blockchain is promising but crypto currency is a ponzi".

Tbh they probably think a public token like link is just a "scam" like Bitcoin. If you asked them about link tokens they'd probably be like "bUt iT'S noT BaCkED bY AnyThINg!!!"

When you think of it like this, a bet on chainlink is partially a bet on these no-coinet companies getting btfo as crypto becomes ubiquitous. Assuming you believe crypto will become ubiquitous.

Why would any of them do that? It's bad for business in the same way that Bitmain majority attacking Bitcoin would be suicide.

>stash like a little cuck
>postbobe your inevitable suicide
>I am not fudding
Absolute state of fudders

Attached: 1543689596570.jpg (733x597, 232K)

why can't fruit be compared?
there's just all of these conflicting principles

Bump for somebody to answer this

This might be nice for link:
www-coindesk-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.coindesk.com/the-race-is-on-to-replace-ethereums-most-centralized-layer/amp?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1#referrer=https://www.google.com&_tf=From %1$s&share=https://www.coindesk.com/the-race-is-on-to-replace-ethereums-most-centralized-layer

Ethereum needs decentralized APIa for the most basic shit

>Do you really think that banks need completely trustless delivery of information?
No no no. You got it all wrong.

The strength of this technology is not so much the fact that the data is trustless, but more so the fact that smart contracts have the ability to completely automize payouts, eliminating the need for entire teams of people hired to do just that. Now, if you replace people with a computer protocol automatically executing payouts, you THEN need to ensure the data is trustless.

okay I will bite
what you nigger faggots need to understand is that YES they will be using permissioned chains, essentially exactly what they do now, but CL allows those permissioned nodes to interact with decentralised data sources like multiple USD/BTC price feeds instead of just one (point of failure). So, thus, you will be able to get your insurance paid out (from NEET nodes submitting weather data) in USD (thank you permissioned SWIFT node) and viola, a permissioned node can now interact with decentralised networks and DAPPs. Thus SWIFT payments get to benefit from decentralised networks and CL has value as a decentralised information provider (oracle network, decentralised).

>"i have insider info and link is about to go to the moon!" thread #659275938
Yawn

Smart contacts™

Attached: sketch-1543881777429.png (1440x1080, 1016K)

> So, thus, you will be able to get your insurance paid out (from NEET nodes submitting weather data) in USD (thank you permissioned SWIFT node) and viola, a permissioned node can now interact with decentralised networks and DAPPs.
absolutely wrong

>censoring the penis
closet homo

Doesn't work that way

Sorry my dude, you don't know anything. That you're just figuring out one of the main hype points from months and months ago just shows how far behind the curve you are.

Permissioned blockchains will eventually need to connect to public blockchains and the intranet / internet analogy seems apt. This is bullish news for link. Remember the old swift parents diagram with the "connector"? That's link.

Attached: FB_IMG_1543927830926.jpg (1081x720, 53K)

just sayin

Attached: who is that.jpg (640x446, 193K)

They don't need it to be trustless because the banks and private blockchains will be trusted, just like this works now. There are already so many incentives in place to make that trust so reliable that it's trustlessness is simply unnecessary.

instead of just saying that, point out where he is wrong.
he is 100% correct and member of the chainlink team have confirmed that permissioned blockchains wont use the token.

>Blockchain agnostic

>you-u-ur w-w-rong!
Eternally btfod

this.
people still think trustlessness implies that trust is bad or that no one trusts anyone. the world is built on trust and works fine the way it is but we PAY FOR THAT TRUST.
trustlessness isn’t about banks worrying about other banks fucking them over, it’s about letting them do the same things they’ve always done but cheaper so that they can better fuck over the rest of us.

PSD2 is the primary reason I became involved with ChainLink and co-founded this subreddit. For context, I work in the Financial Services sector in the EMEA region, and I can tell you it is all about PSD2. In 2019, every European Financial Institution must provide API support for payment initiation and account enquiry made by the incoming onslaught of new Fintechs.

The banking landscape in Europe will change radically in a short period as Europeans begin to take advantage of the latest technology offered by Fintechs to meet their banking needs in today's world. Blockchain technology has come along at precisely the right time, and DLT has become almost as big of a buzz-word as Fintech itself. Also, in extraordinarily good timing comes ChainLink, a service that bridges the gap between Fintechs using DLT and Financial Institution APIs.

Behind the shiny new APIs lies the prize that SmartContract have evidently positioned themselves on - legacy payment systems that will accept nothing but the payment formats they were originally designed for. This format is likely to be the new (actually >15 years old) ISO 20022 XML format. Any Fintechs wishing to make use of the new APIs can bet for sure that the Banks will not be converting formats on their behalf and instead will need to submit instructions in ISO 20022 format. Through their PoC with SWIFT, ChainLink has proven themselves as being capable of not just bridging the gap, but supporting the very formats that will run the post-PSD2 banking world.

There is a lot of speculation since the PoC about a partnership with SWIFT. For me, SWIFT has already given ChainLink something very valuable; a platform on the closed stage of the Financial Services Industry. SWIFT is seen in the sector as the keeper and enforcer of best practice for financial messaging standards so when Fintechs and Banks decide which Oracle services to use, ChainLink stands poised as a service made credible by SWIFT.

It's important to note that after the introduction of PSD2 APIs, Banks and Fintechs will not require SWIFT's telecommunications to communicate and therefore can work directly with ChainLink to connect to on-chain/off-chain data.

Often people suggest firms will just build their own oracles, but the reality is Banks will not be providing this service as, unsurprisingly, they aren't going to make the job any easier for 3rd party Fintechs. Meanwhile, Fintechs are often brand new companies who are not going to be spending their start-up funds re-writing Microsoft Outlook just because they can - they will simply engage with the industry standard oracle; ChainLink.

As you can tell, I am bullish about ChainLink. Often in crypto, the old saying about how the guy selling shovels in a gold rush is the one to get rich. Well, I believe PSD2 is another gold rush and ChainLink is the first in the door selling the shovels, the diggers, and the whole wash plant.

Yall need Jesus linkmarine in your lives.
If private blockchains don’t need decentralised oracles, they will not use link mainnet. Which means they don’t even need trustless oracle at all. Just simple localhost Jason parser will suffice.

If they however need, they will have to use link mainnet.

will this be carried out on public or on permissionless chains?

Attached: 47833_Side_Profile_Web.jpg (1000x664, 46K)

Can the fudder take down this pasta
(This fudder)