Simply reposting, not my write up. This should help you nulinkers a bit.
A while back there was a clip that cirulated where a bitcoin maximalist said something to the effect of "if someone were to solve the oracle problem, it would be worth more than all of crypto"
He then went on to give the standard counterargument that sybill attacks fundamentally prevent resolution of the oracle problem.
He was almost right
Here's the reality: in isolation without external factors this is correct. Put differently: if all of crypto was created de-novo and no data/api providers existed before the advent of chainlink, there would exist an equilibrium at which sybill attacks would be more profitable than delivering quality data or outputs. If this was the case, there are ways of breaking this state, but they involve exchange of value first in a non-deterministic manner and then using the experience from that to bootstrap an oracle network.
Fortunately, before crypto the world did exist. This led to trust systems being developed to reign in this situation (lawsuits, word-of-mouth reputation, the value of name recognition) in a world of non-deterministic interactions. For chainlink this is an absolute blessing.
The entwork will launch with actors providing APIs and data that are linked to their real-world names and practices. This means that even outside of the sybill equilibrium, there will be significant pressure to have high quality inputs and outputs. A bank can't expect to keep its good name if it makes a habit of screwing its smart contract customers while keeping good practices with its standard customers.
So what follows logically from this? The initial network has to tap into this entropy of trust left over from the non-deterministic world. In other words, it can't be decentralized initially unless the network wants to go through a growth period where bad behavior is actually game-theory optimal (with asymptotic approach to trustworthy behavior).
Human beings being what they are, such a period would sour people against the use of smart contracts if they could be scammed early on, even if they were safer than conventional alternatives.
For an example of this look at common perception of bitcoin. It has provided 24/7 value transfer at discount rates since its launch 10 years ago. During that time billions have been transferred without loss. On top of that it has increased in value from less than a dollar to over a thousand dollars. Any stock, bond or precious metal that did that would be hailed as the greatest investment in the history of the world.
But human perception matters.
For that reason the chainlink network cannot launch decentralized and must launch with as much provider/node transparency as possible. This sets the floor for node behavior when the network does decentralize. Only though doing it this way will people, with all their flaws, see the value.
Put another way: the only way to successfully launch any oracle network is from the top down with respect to real-world trust. If you could launch a perfectly coded, perfectly transparent, perfectly decentralized oracle network right now you would still lose to chainlink. An oracle network must first have the buy in (and implicit pledge to perform) of those agencies with the most real world trust. The network which harvests these residual trust sources from the real world is the one that wins, and the one that wins is the de facto monopoly because those that can't harvest this resource must traverse the sybill period to launch.
You are about to see an entire industry (the trust assurances industry) be swallowed whole by a decentralized network. The marginal value of all trust assurances services in the world (contracts lawyers, non-criminal courts, administrative workers etc.) will become the chainlink network. Those groups which don't make this transition will cease to exist. In 20 years it will be hard to imagine how the world functioned without such a network, just as it's hard to imagine a world without the internet now.
You're about to watch the whole world realize, slowly, this new reality. Remember that it takes hours and hours of dedication to get what I'm saying right now. Next year you'll just have to be a CEO/CTO level person to understand. The year after that, someone who is considered smart and cutting edge. You're about to witness all of this happen.
At this point, there is nothing that can be done to stop it. Even if the whole chainlink team died, the cat is out of the bag. Once traditional trust assurers understand this, such a network can't not exist.
In retrospect it's quite funny how simple it is to answer any kind of sybil FUD.
Retarded fudsters focus *purely* on the current iteration of the software without having any sort of idea of the business development needed to transition from old trust assurance structures to new ones..
Then they reply with "haha you don't understand code", but really they can't tell the forest from the trees.
>mfw nulinkers haven't read most of the amazing bullish write ups and screenshots >mfw even nulinker's wildest hopiums is an underestimate of link's potential
SHUT UP ITS NOT DECENTRALIZED YOU FUCKIJG NON CODING PIECE OF SHIT! ITS NOT MY FAULT YOU IDIOTS SIAID IT WAS A SCAM UNDER THOSE REDDIT POSTS! ITS A FUCKING SCAM YOU FUCKING FAGGOT, YOURE GONA LSOE ALL YOUR MONEY YOU STUPID MORON!! NO IM BEING COMPLETELY REASONABLE SPENDING MY TIME MAKING 40 POSTS TRYING TO CONVINCE YOU TO SELL!
Yeah, It sucks not being able to invest and get at least 1k, even busting my ass
Nolan Rivera
By the way some people suspect they was Sergey himself posting due to the writing style and a few other tells and clues. I would agree with that sentiment. The thread I posted is the original OP
can a fren help a nulinker out to come back to the light?
rn I can only afford 300 LINK. thats why I'm a nolinker. I trade shitcoins in the hopes that I can outperform LINK. when should I actually move everything into LINK 300 is simply not enough. 300k in a few years are still not enough.
regardless can anyone point me to the best ressources for chainlink research. I only know about the oracle problem and chainlink very superficially.
the shilling was unreal I migrated to bizrael about 2 years ago exactly. I didn't trust chainlink and after the massive dump from the first ATH I didn't bother to think about it and though it was a pajeet scam.
Chainlink is the epitome of a multi-level and intelligent scam. There are only three or four people on the team, who have some of the most unimpressive resumes in the blockchain field. Their Testnet consisted of nothing more than a simple JSON Parser, something that any college freshman could put together over a weekend. Remember all of those "projects" during late 2017 that ended up being nothing more than vaporware? Chainlink is one of them. Somehow they've survived for two years, but I think that's due to the different approach they have taken. Instead of hyping their coin, they've stayed extremely patient. They know that they can make more money from you over the course of a few years rather than weeks. I would be very cautious if you decided to buy Chainlink, as it could very well be the worst decision you've ever made. The CEO of SmartContract (Sergey Nazarov), the founder of Chainlink, holds a degree in Sociology and a minor in Religious Studies. He's also worn the same shirt at every single conference for the past two years. Is that really someone you want to trust with your money? Don't fall for all of the technical terms used in this talk. Those words mean nothing. The people in the crowd don't even know what he's talking about. The Blockchain Team Leader at Microsoft, Chad O'fork, said this about Chainlink in February 2018: "While Smartcontract and Chainlink are interesting projects, I doubt there would be any real use-case in the future for such technology. Companies do not like to put their data in the hands of anonymous node operators."
Wyatt Rodriguez
>0,5k Is this the new way of saying 500? You had two fucking years faggot.
Lol faggots coping about KYC nodes don't realize RLC solved the oracle problem without KYC nodes thanks to the PoCo algorithm.
Charles Bell
>LINK whitepaper admits it'll be a problem >actually says they'll deal with it later down the road
Cameron Perez
>By the way some people suspect they was Sergey himself posting due to the writing style and a few other tells and clues. I hadn't realized it but the writing does seem familiar, and goddam if it isn't too easy to read that in his voice with the same cadence he uses.
Why would he post a picture that is pic related? Maybe it's one of his favorites?
IM A DEV IM INTELLIGENT YOU CANT CODE YOURE LOW IQ
Elijah Cooper
Nope. Stop shilling pajeet.
See >Put another way: the only way to successfully launch any oracle network is from the top down with respect to real-world trust. If you could launch a perfectly coded, perfectly transparent, perfectly decentralized oracle network right now you would still lose to chainlink. An oracle network must first have the buy in (and implicit pledge to perform) of those agencies with the most real world trust. The network which harvests these residual trust sources from the real world is the one that wins, and the one that wins is the de facto monopoly because those that can't harvest this resource must traverse the sybill period to launch.
Is google and oracle backing RLC? No.
either bait or didn't read anything
Jaxon Bell
Just admit it LINK is dead. It's dumping as we speak.
Landon Young
You know, that is what these people actually waste their time on: posting on Jow Forums, in order to win 3 new investors. They really have nothing better to do.
Julian Powell
Bored waiting for moon, I'll admit I may entertain silly ideas for enjoyment in the meantime
>While Smartcontract and Chainlink are interesting projects, I doubt there would be any real use-case in the future for such technology. Companies do not like to put their data in the hands of anonymous node operators." And 64kb will be enough for everyone!(c)
Julian Wood
>dumping upwards >down another 5% It's bleeding out and you can't admit it.
Isaac Myers
This was not Sergey I can guarantee you that
David Bailey
Basicaly
Xavier Ross
The problem is that I wasnt into crypto since last year and Im pior, I AM busting my ass to get more link. Currently at 370. Its hard for me user.
>Muh real world trust >Muh Google blog post You're going to get rekt. It's impossible to Sybil attack RLCs oracle. Face it, you invested in a one dimensional shitcoin and latch onto irrelevant things to cope.
Eli Torres
Good, I will try to buy some tomorrow If I get paid
Fuck you, poorfag. Maybe I will hire you for my hookers to spit on you after they sucked my dick when I make It, you faggot. How does a ¢ / week sound? Bet you just creamed yourself. I wish I could beat the shit out of you right now.
Liam Baker
You won't even want to after tonight's shitstorm.
Aiden Stewart
What is going on? Why is this happening?
Ew
Carter Lee
This. Trust will be axiomatic for Chainlink's users long before bad actors ever try a sybil attack
>decentralized oracles >dependent upon established systems/institutions of trust >solves the oracle problem You need to reread what you've written user. You're arguing against yourself.
Luis Ramirez
Nice try, but he's clearly not. He is talking about a centralized launch that is the foundation for a decentralize network. There's literally no other way around it.
Angel Lopez
It's literally no different than the "coordinator" IOTA is dependent upon and will someday get rid of when the network can stand on its own. Someday. There's is nothing trustless about chainlink in its current form and there's only a promise that someday in the future it will be. Hopefully.
James Williams
did you really use the cents symbol nigga
Brody Ramirez
Who gives a fuck about IOTA? Nice distraction. The only "centralized" aspect of the network is an initial KYC phase, where the first nodes running are vetted and carefully selected. If you don't trust the network, don't use it until it's fully decentralized. Don't worry, it won't be long.
Thomas Cox
You pretty much didn't understand the write up at all if you're saying this. The new system of trust assurance necessarily HAS to slowly succeed the old system. Lawyers, paper contracts, and so on won't disappear overnight. It can't happen overnight and it sure as hell won't happen because you wrote some piece of code.
The people who will use the link network at first, are literal whales don't give a shit about your lines of code. They want a system that is secure and works. Chainlink hasn't decreased the cost of trust by a million times *yet*, only by 100x or so. Chainlink does solve the oracle problem, you literally can't argue that if you understood the whitepaper. Sure, the network isn't 100% yet, but if you read the whitepaper you would've noticed that it was implied that mainnet wouldn't launch with all the features. The real problem here is getting people to use it. Yes, real business people, who don't browse autistic forums such as these. People from SWIFT, google, oracle, and so on.
Essentially, the software is the easy part. The hard part is the fundamental transition in business philosophy and changing human perception on smart contracts. And if you look at the team's approach, they're doing a really fucking good job on this aspect.
Matthew Price
Brainlet here. Just read the white paper, am I correct in my understanding that Chainlink is relying on Intel GSX to ensure the oracles could function without making the query and the answer public? That going forward they are hoping to make this step MORE trustless (but not completely) via third-party competition?
