BREAKING NEWS: LINK MARINES BLOWN THE FUCK OUT AFTER NEW iEXEC DORACLE POST
medium.com
We went to the scene for a comment from LINK holders.
LINK bagholder: "NO NO NO NO NO NO NO FUCK THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING"
What's clear for now is the only thing being linked in the chainlink network will be LINKers asses to toilet seats, as RLC takes begins to take leadership in the DOracle space.
Back to the studio.
i am linking this post to high iq posts
>doracle
baka
Sacre blue!!
dorkl
BEGONE OP THIS IS NOW A LINK THREAD
Check out those digits, I think 4.44 eow sounds right
Checked and kekpilled
>muh DO'Hracles
iExec shilling for the industry standard decentralized oracle network
white flag. so french
dilate
CHECKED AND KEK’D
FRENCH FUCKS BTFO
OP...it's not looking good...
gtfo
LINK is kang
But RLC is pretty cool.
It will moon off the success of chainlink once the normies starts looking for the next "LINK" and the new cool buzzword "oracles" is imprinted in their minds.
It also helps that iExec is as legit as a team can get only second to Chainlink, so theres that aswell.
Only the high IQ Linkies holds both.
>Ranked 173
oi i am laffing
Normies are still disgesting "crypto" lmao. At least 2 years until they talk about oracles
LARP aside this is what I see as most likely too, assuming LINK hits top 10. Just like all the other niches of crypto people look for the lesser known alternatives with potential.
sidechain scaling is coming in 6 months, not 100% sure but there may be zero transaction fees at that time.
If so RLC would become cheaper than LINK to use for oracles, which will still have very high transaction fees on ETH. But chainlink would have a bigger network effect.
It might just be consensus fees that sidechain scaling eliminates though I haven't confirmed.
Also iExec has a reputation system by workerpool and nodes stake RLC for collateral with a protocol that looks for outliers and punishes them, just like LINK.
5/15
never baguette
Fact is LINK is in prealpha state and RLC is in earlybeta soon to be a fully made product. Stinkies will keep fuding this godcoin but all they feel is fear
>top 10
top 10 is FUD
it's going to top 3
>top 10 is FUD
>If so RLC would become cheaper than LINK to use for oracles
Firstly, based on what pricing moron
Secondly, threshold sigs and pay for how many nodes you want, ie. how decentralized
IExec holders are brainlet tier at best
Thank god i sold 70% of my Links into RLC week ago.
HMMMMM, ONE OF THESE HAS A MARKET VALUE OF 200 SATS, AND THE OTHER 20,000 SATS
I WONDER WHICH ONE THE MARKET HAS RECOGNIZED AS MORE VALUABLE...
Patricians hold Veo instead
Exactly how they keep searching for the next Ethereum and pumped shitcoins like Zilliqa, EOS, Tron, Cardano and NEO.
iExec will ride the LINK train eventually. Also they never set out to be a oracle network, its just a tiny part of what they can provide, but not what they set out to accomplish. They will help push smart contracts and oracle adoption in their own right once the ball gets rolling.
Should we actually be worried about this
>Goku animation to explain oracles
Ffs op..
Just stop.
People are already are seeing LINK as a threat
Unironically bullish af just bought 100k more
>web3
Yes, they are partnered with Chainlink. Need more copium franjeet?
Based on free market competition with no PAYMENT transaction fees on the RLC network which are big for API calls on ETH (if sidechain scaling does eliminate this). The network effect if chainlink will still mean it leads the way even with this though imo
Yeah, makes sense.
See
Actually curious about how it works, but don’t dream, they will bend the knee
> Not curious about shit
> no one is curious about this scamcoin
> gilles keeps feeding his lame threads answering to himself with fake IPs
> what's next is pic related
Didn't someone post a picture of the link and iExec teams together at some point?
onI'm keeping an eye on it. Seems natural for their product. I think it uses the same consensus mechanism as their decentralized computing. They're doing pretty interesting things (distributed computing power, TEE computing) and seem to be working with big names in the industry.
iexec was caught flat-out lying about Chainlink, see
they steal money and suck cocks, obviously they are liars too
I'm giving iexec exactly 1 month to bend the knee.
I saw a linky explain that at the time of posting each point was correct. It is out of date now though because link went main net
>iExec
literally who
Stop posting this. What is even the point?
>I saw a linky explain that at the time of posting each point was correct.
The point about Chainlink not having SGX hasn't been correct since the white paper came out in 2017.
And if they were being autistic about "it's true currently!", then why did they count Chainlink as a "decentralized oracle" before mainnet?
Also, Witnet is still not on mainnet.
That chart was a complete mess, and they removed it almost immediately after posting it after being pressured.
Chainlink are probably using iExecs PoCo protocol for their oracle results comparing
>say something 120 years ago that was applicable at the time
>120 years later brainlet says its a lie because its no longer applicable
Being this fucking retarded
Dapp has dorkle problem
The point about Chainlink not having SGX hasn't been correct since the white paper came out in 2017.
And if they were being autistic about "it's true currently!", then why did they count Chainlink as a "decentralized oracle" before mainnet?
Also, Witnet is still not on mainnet.
That chart was a complete mess, and they removed it almost immediately after posting it after being pressured.
Faggot nigger jannies
kek wills it
>sgx
they acquired a fucking town crier for that purpose
the absolute state of franjeet fud
Plus, the white paper (released in September 2017) mentions SGX about 50 times, and was already rife with TC integration.
Ari Juels himself co-wrote it ffs.
Once again, the chart was old and literally created prior to any of this. Are all chainlink holders this emotional?
never thought this would be relevant again
>link whitepaper
2017
>town crier acquisition
2018
Checked. Goddamn son
You will see a few RLC threads a day from the 99th percentile of IQ on this board
In 2 months this will turn into around 10 threads a day as the 95th percentile of IQ understands what's happening.
Then it will turn into dozens of threads a day as the remainder of people here catch on. Finally history will repeat with RLC just as it has and will continue to do with LINK.
So they created the chart before September 2017, and posted it mid-May 2019?
There's no way to put a positive spin on this.
Either iexec are lying or they're incompetent.
>trusting frogs, ever
Yeah just like Mobius, Aeternity, Witnet, etc
They posted an old chart and didnt update it based on what the chainlink devs were planning to implement. Regardless of acquiring TC, the issue hadn’t been addressed prior to mainnet release. This isnt that hard. I know you chainlink kids are primarily just following the meme with your 1.5k linkies, but damn....wake up. Theres money to be made.
>Doracle
I kinda wish they went with d.oracle instead, never trust the french to come up with a good name
>Regardless of acquiring TC, the issue hadn’t been addressed prior to mainnet release.
It's all so tiresome.
>They posted an old chart
According to you, in May 2019 iexec posted a chart that was made before September 2017.
And that chart features Witnet, a project that was born in 2018.
Stop deluding yourself.
Cheeeeck
They're holding on to whatever they can user, it was never about the chart
Dump it
>posts image of market maker projections
So an actual "suicide stack" will be 5 to 10 LINK when alls said and done and it finally represents a significant portion (as collateral) of the GDP of planet earth.
gotcha
>comfy
So ive read up until this point, and let me ask you a question: why should I ( or anyone else) give a fuck about any of this?
>why should I ( or anyone else) give a fuck about a crypto lying to boost its value
Is this really your question?
>you think it was a lie
>other guy says it wasnt
>arguing about dates
You both sound like faggots desu. Im talking about from a technical position, not an bickering little faggot position, why should I care about this?
Why did you switch IDs?
Either it was an outright lie, or iexec really somehow didn't know about Chainlink and SGX.
Either is terrible.
But most likely they lied, considering all the inconsistencies.
it's not about the chart user
they will just keep spewing
>but the chart! the CHART!
it's because it's literally all they have to hold on to
No clue, on a phone
Still doesn’t answer my question. All well, I will continue to dive into the tech and see if its worth diving in. Thanks fren.
>Buy 30c
>sell 50c
>buy 40c
This coin is gonna have me singing alouette
linkies would rather have you buy their coin that's up 200%. Iexec does everything link does and is also a cloud computing free market mainframe. do the deep dive into the tech user, you'll soon be ignoring linkies as much as the rest of the die hard RLC holders too. thanks for making the commitment to reading about the project before you let link shills decide for you.
1
It released dorkles on mainnet before chainlink.
Has a qualified team with multiple patents in the cloud industry.
Mentioned alongside chainlink in an Ethereum specification
Innovated a proof of contribution protocol to come to consensus on what nodes did what share of decentralised computing to process tasks
Cons:
Shit at marketing
French
Your question is "why should I care if my investment is run by scammy/incompetent people?".
It answers itself.
2
eat shit retard
Imagine buying an overvalued Link when Rlc is undervalued and do the exact same things and even more
Gilles I love you let me be your tranny
>dragon ball gifs
>matrix gifs
please, PLEASE tell me that's not an official blog post
JESUS Christ
Peculate
Oh and the french government directly gave them €2,000,000 as a grant. What does that tell you?
HOLY SHIT LINK IS BTFO WITH THIS UPDATE IT MAKES RLC ORACLE'S SEEM MUCH MORE FLEXIBLE AND POWERFUL HAHAHAHA GET FUCKED NIGGERS
>in a perfect world we would have access to Intel's master certificate and we could verify enclave signatures like we verify SSL certificates
lmao, that's grade A bullshit.
SSL cerficates can only be verified on-chain if they were issued on-chain.
Enclave signatures can NEVER be issued on-chain. If it were any other way, they wouldn't be enclaves.
And this is very different from the claim they made in the chart, where they said Chainlink has no support for TEE enclaves AT ALL.
zee kids, dey like l'dragonballe, HEE HEE HON HON
Mentioned? iExec was the main author with Intel. Sergey/LINK also contributed:
>Dumb nigger doesn't understand the PoCo algorithm
Kek
What month was it you guys realised iExec isn't actually a source of humor but actually a better option than Chainlink?
wrong
>fundamentally
>fundamental
>fundamentally fundamental
Nothing ever could compare to the embarrassment of having sergay as your brand ambassador
I had a feeling when they announced RLC was capable of oracles that it would somehow be better.
This medium post just sealed the deal.
Whenever Sergey is referred to he's quoted as the most knowledgeable and respected source on oracles, and he keeps getting invited to the big stages to give presentations. His words go way above the low IQ heads.
There's nothing embarrassing about him.
PoCo has nothing to do with this.
PoCo involves using the attestation API, it's the exact same principle.
lol k
The funniest part about all of this is that the linkies here will spam the board to drown out this news because it absolutely terrifies them when they should be buying a suicide stack of RLC and promoting conversation about link and RLC.