HIGH IQ CHAINLINK PRIVATE REPO DISCUSSION

You are more emotionally attached to your investment than a nigger to his chicken, and you have the nerve to call yourself "high IQ"
baka

Don't reply to tripfags
Hide tripthreads

Try to make your Larps more believable. They said there are no private repos
> two mainnet releases
lmao
>This lets their clients get their nodes setup and staked
lmao what, clients will not be the ones running the network
And why would they need to stake beforehand, makes no sense.
> tested in the open until September
This is not nearly enough time to do any of those things, stop larping if you can't even understand the basics

The team that's been working on some blockchain consensuses?
What does that anything have to do with Chainlink?
>and it sounded a lot like ChainLink
Please point me to this where it sounds a lot like Chainlink.

pagan

>"The way this protocol works is incredibly simple yet incredibly powerful," he said.
"Referred to as Snowflake, Snowball and Avalanche, the protocols randomly sample network participants, and ultimately choose a single result, Sirer said. "

Don’t speak to Steve like that.

absolutely everything you just typed is wrong and faggy in so many ways, I stopped counting. Here is your (you).

Attached: fag talk.jpg (1274x830, 153K)

Thank you for this info based Steve

>everything you just typed is wrong

>there are no private repos
Source: confirmed by Thomas
>clients of the networks running their own nodes in a system that's supposed to decentralize the process, not bring it back under the same central structure
Source: common sense
>This is not nearly enough time to do any of those things
Source: pivotal tracker
Now lets see your superior arguments hm?

meant to quote this retard

Are there tickets for things that haven’t had PRs open in the public repo but are complete? Yes? Then they’re going into the private repo.

See:

Chainlink will NEVER be $1 again.

When mainnet user?

I love how stinky linkies think their thrash will ever be anything but a shitty ERC20 token.

here is your superior argument, you are still talking like a wrong faggot.

Attached: ur an faggit.jpg (600x1800, 135K)

I'm gonna need a source of Thomas saying there are no private repos. The current ChainLink repo was a private repo at one point, it's possible there is another.

you right, it will jump straight to 10

its not even an erc20 token tho retard. you must be new here.

This was a pain in the ass to read, learn when to use meme arrows

TY Steve keep up the good work

So, is anyone here actually going to discuss how the reputation and consensus parts are still nowhere to be seen?

Ah yes, the classic, no-argument bagholder resorting to adhoms

I don't know, but not any time soon.

I tried to scroll back in slack but old messages already got deleted. I'm sure someone has saved a screenshot.

It's a perfectly fine use of meme arrows, sorry for your autism.

He used to say this...now they do not answer this questions (for last month). This makes me think there is a private repo...also Steve Ellis has contributed way less over the last month (20 commits) than his usualy 50-100 commits. Another sign of a private repo was someone screenshotting steve ellis's github profile showing commits to a private repo but he has since changes his settings to private.

Why would they do that, dear user?
When they could just attack everyone that tries to bring some discussion to the table instead of the regular delusions, that way it's much easier to cope with the fact that they'll be bagholding for much longer than previously expected.

>now they do not answer this questions (for last month).
He said this probably not even 2 weeks ago.

ask him today..you will not get a response. The team does not lie and when you get to close to the truth they shut down.

Why are you so negative and aggressive? Linkies are supposed to be supportive and kind.

>two mainnet releases

yes. nodes and the reputation system/network are two distinct projects. that's clear if you're not a brainlet since the network is made up of nodes so they clearly have to come first.

>lmao what, clients will not be the ones running the network
>And why would they need to stake beforehand, makes no sense.

read the whitepaper brainlet. yes clients do run their own nodes. and you're right, they don't NEED to stake anything while its not being officially used in production, but in order to test that smart contracts are handling staking requirements properly they'll stake small amounts during this phase.

>This is not nearly enough time to do any of those things, stop larping if you can't even understand the basics

they're already working on it and have been for a while, so ya its plenty of time since it'll be their sole focus after nodes are released to mainnet in June/July. developing the reputation system has less to do with code and more to do with the math of the system which they worked through ages ago when Ari Juels was helping write the whitepaper.

jesus FUD has either gotten weaker or nolinkers are just dumber.

thanks bro

Attached: 86AD4199-9518-4385-BDC7-98D41692D39E.jpg (400x400, 16K)

Well we don't know how the team operates. Maybe they kept this from him. But when the team previously worked in private, they had no trouble confirming that info to the public.

Because Chainlink community has become so cancerous. I used to hold 200k LINK, now that number is closer to 100k so it's not like I'm FUDing for no reason.
Most of these things started off as a meme and now there are genuine people believing in $1000 EOY.
You present them with the facts and they just won't listen, they say you're wrong but at the same time are unable to provide anything to backup their deluded claims except "connect the dots" or some shit like that

Thanks making me feel extra comfy, also checked my dude

Attached: 1246717823566.jpg (700x525, 54K)

if the consesus and reputation stuff is that important to the success of their product it'd be no wonder if they had a private repo, they probably got more than one.

Attached: RhZGwVr.png (750x323, 116K)

this is supposed to be a high iq discussion, user

Not from Thomas, but:

>"The missing link(pun intended) is currently the staking/matching contract which will drive the process of how oracle nodes are matched with requesting smart contracts. This is currently not in the public repo."

medium.com/@alekseyklintsevich/technical-overview-of-the-chainlink-testnet-implementation-c8a0b09276d1

I know they're distinct but there is no reason to release only one part to the main net because it's useless by itself.
>setup and staked before the network officially goes live so they can test everything.
All the testing can be done on ropsten, why would they need Ethereum main net so they can test everything again?

>yes clients do run their own nodes
Ok sure, and where exactly does it say this?

> but in order to test that smart contracts are handling staking requirements properly they'll stake small amounts during this phase.
You mean "clients" will do this staking or? Isn't this what ropsten test net is about, for testing?
They can stake ropsten LINK. I understand companies wanting to test how nodes work so they run one on testnet.
But please explain to me what sense would it make for a company to run their own LINK nodes on main net?

>they're already working on it and have been for a while
And how could you possibly know this? The last piece of information that thomas gave us was that everything is public. Of course I'm not assuming they would be literally starting from scratch. They probably have the idea laid out on how it'll work but they still need to write, implement and test all of this.

Not an argument

Working out, looking for a part time job to get me out of the house, and working on some hobbies that can make me money.

Lying about how much link you own doesn't improve your FUD

>HIGH IQ

Attached: LINK_TARD_PLAY.jpg (576x444, 99K)

its not useless without the rest. the Chainlink network is decentralized, but you can use it in a centralized way if you specify which node to use rather than request data from the network.

>Ok sure, and where exactly does it say this?

sorry I don't read to brainlets. you don't understand Chainlink at all if you don't understand clients will be node operators.

>You mean "clients" will do this staking or? Isn't this what ropsten test net is about, for testing?

ropsten lets them test with ropsten tokens, but not real tokens. right now there's no faucet for ropsten tokens so nobody is testing against it. they'll begin testing only when the team says its officially stable, at which point they'll release node support on Ethereum mainnet before finishing the reputation system since there's no reason to not release it once its stable. at this point you'll start to see big wallets moving big stacks to clients with higher frequency.

>And how could you possibly know this? The last piece of information that thomas gave us was that everything is public. Of course I'm not assuming they would be literally starting from scratch. They probably have the idea laid out on how it'll work but they still need to write, implement and test all of this.

not everything is public. there was a screenshot floating around confirming they've been working in a private repo and Aleksei or whatever his name is from Microsoft effectively confirmed the reputation system exists as a private repo. the released only part of it in public for now because for now they want all eyes on the nodes, since that's the part developers will be working with. they'll release the network publicly only once the nodes have reached a stable state.

You're right. I would totally waste my time arguing with shitcoin bagholders of a project I have no financial interest in, you got me!
That's not even that much LINK.

Thomas also said they're not focusing on this right now, that's the reason there's nothing about those contracts on pivotal tracker.
And about 2 weeks ago he said there's nothing in private. So I'm guessing something changed during these past 2 weeks and they're maybe starting to work on this...
If they really finish these contracts in parallel with nodes and this whole Steve private commits is true then maybe it really could take 3 months but I highly doubt it.

Wagecucking, school, and hobbies

There's always one naysaying faggot in the high IQ threads that ruins it. I'm so glad he will not make it.

> where exactly does it say this?
My guy, this is THE WHOLE POINT OF THE FUCKING TOKEN. How do you get a decentralized network of oracle nodes if third-party clients aren't running them?
Quit shitting up an attempt at conversation with your knuckle-dragging ignorance and idiocy. Like, i'm all for trolls, but put a fucking ounce of effort in.
It's not in private repo (they explicitly said ~their team~ isnt doing any more private repos), but they're no doubt working with the Cornell team. The Ari Jules connection is obvious there, but they can claim in all honesty that they're not working on it while also being a part of that development under the table.

there's a separate pivotal tracker too brainlet. and their commits to a private repo confirms they are focusing on it, they're just splitting their time between the nodes and the reputation system.

>they explicitly said ~their team~ isnt doing any more private repos

that was a LARP because Jow Forums is a terribly cancerous place and they're not going to give you any more than they have to. for now nodes are the most important. after them, the reputation system is the most important.

It wasn't a LARP it was straight from Rory's account in the official slack, dummy.
They're working on it, yes, but not in a CL team-sanctioned private repo.
Much like how it's technically an open-source project above board, but in reality very much team-focused.

Also, this -- there are currently companies using the Ruby network for smartcontracts. It's already a working project, got pushed back a few months when they switched to Go.

>its not useless without the rest. the Chainlink network is decentralized
The consensus and reputation is what makes it truly decentralized, that's what makes it a network. Otherwise you're only dealing with a single node at a time.

>sorry I don't read to brainlets. you don't understand Chainlink at all if you don't understand clients will be node operators.
I get it, you pulled this one out of your ass and now you can't provide the source.

>ropsten lets them test with ropsten tokens, but not real tokens.
So? It mimics the real tokens without wasting money on testing. I don't see how testnet tokens perform any less of a job than real tokens would. They can send ropsten tokens to anyone who contacts them.

>How do you get a decentralized network of oracle nodes if third-party clients aren't running them?
I don't know, maybe you get third fucking parties to run the nodes?
If SWIFT is a client on the network, how are they a third party you dumb fuck. Dumb bagholders like you are the third party.
>Quit shitting up an attempt at conversation
lol, you don't understand the basic concept of ANYTHING we mentioned here, I'd shut the fuck up if I were you.

>there's a separate pivotal tracker too
Great, are you another le insider too? Fucking faggot.

...

I don't doubt it exists but I'd really like to see this screenshot of Thomas saying there's no private repo. I'm curious as to exactly how it's worded and the context.

I'm not inclined to believe a Technical Community Manager is going to have more inside information than a software engineer who's working on projects for both Chainlink and Microsoft. Maybe a private repo did just get created recently and this is why they're contradicting one another, but I think it's more likely that Thomas just doesn't have that level of security clearance so he didn't know about it.

>The consensus and reputation is what makes it truly decentralized, that's what makes it a network. Otherwise you're only dealing with a single node at a time.

... that's what I said dumbass. you don't have to interact with it decentrally, its just the only option that is decentralized. you can still run your own node and have it only work with a smart contract you control though. you don't need to use it as a network brainlet.

>I get it, you pulled this one out of your ass and now you can't provide the source.

the source is the whitepaper. if you haven't read it I'm not going to read it to you. clients running nodes is such a central point of the system that there's no point in spoon feeding you.

>So? It mimics the real tokens without wasting money on testing. I don't see how testnet tokens perform any less of a job than real tokens would. They can send ropsten tokens to anyone who contacts them.

the problem isn't so much with ropsten tokens as it is that big coporate IT teams aren't going to start testing while the bugs are still being worked out. they'll only start once its officially released and stable which is why it will be released first.

>Great, are you another le insider too? Fucking faggot.

no I'm just a developer who actually understand how software is developed and not some brainlet gambling in a space I don't understand.

SWIFT is a consortium of thousands of banks and a messaging system. It is not a singular entity in the way you seem to be referring to it. It is used for the banks to communicate.
For SWIFT to be using Chainlink, this means that all of the banks would have their own node with which to transmit their information, and they would use other nodes to communicate and make and implement smartcontracts. They are the clients and the operators. Again, this is the point.
This is why -- if you had read the whitepaper -- a third of circulating Link is set aside for institutional node operators. This is how -- if you had read the whitepaper -- the entire fucking network will operate.
Jesus christ your just the fucking worst I've never interacted with someone so goddamned devoted to being retarded

Rory just basically confirmed that this is true

Attached: C49B9800-12EA-44A7-8A19-E37E52D36D0F.jpg (887x487, 196K)

thread theme
youtube.com/watch?v=2lgCQd-f2Ps

youtube.com/watch?v=cLoytewvn0g

>... that's what I said dumbass. you don't have to interact with it decentrally, its just the only option that is decentralized. you can still run your own node and have it only work with a smart contract you control though. you don't need to use it as a network brainlet.
And that's why I said it's useless to have it on main net by itself if they have the same fucking thing on ropsten.

>if you haven't read it I'm not going to read it to you
hahahahah man, you're gonna have to try harder than that
>We currently have over 19,000 people that have told us they’d like to be ChainLink Node Operators;...we expect that we’ll be able to have a sufficiently large amount of independent node operators to provide a fully decentralized oracle network.
>of independent node operators
>to provide a fully decentralized oracle network
Companies that are using the network are not independent operators that will bring decentralization, how can you be this retarded?

SWIFT is a unique example, what about other companies?
>For SWIFT to be using Chainlink, this means that all of the banks would have their own node
Then what is the point of Chainlink? The node selection is useless, the reputation is useless, the consensus is useless. Basically every single advantage of Chainlink is rendered useless if SWIFT wanted to operate this way.
They could just built this simplified version by themselves and avoid annoyances with the LINK tokens and gas fees.

>This is why -- if you had read the whitepaper -- a third of circulating Link is set aside for institutional node operators.
Institutional being the key word, there is nothing institutional about independent node operators, the word that came from Sergey's mouth.
35% of the tokens are reserved for all the node operators as an incentive probably before the network matures and becomes more self-sustainable and profitable to operate nodes only by client's usage fees.

Yeah, the thread is effectively over. One last time before it dies though:

The team has said there is no private repo for the consensus and validation code. We should take them at face value for that.

However, adviser Ari Jules is at Cornell and is one of their few blockchain guys. As such, I think we can conclude that he's part of Team Rocket, and from there it's a pretty simple inference that he's developing Avalanche et. all specifically for Chainlink:
"The authors, known only as “Team Rocket,” explain how the new protocol family can be used to “construct the core of an internet-scale electronic payment system,” which purportedly has been tested under experimental conditions to a throughput level of 1300 transactions per second, with four-second confirmation latency."
Think about how Assblaster described ICO -- one in name only. Similarly, this project is open source in name only, and the consensus code isn't in private repo only in technicality.

>Companies that are using the network are not independent operators that will bring decentralization, how can you be this retarded?

kek. your brain is made of literal shit pajeet.

Why do you insist on arguing about something when you clearly don't understand the most rudimentary elements of it?

ya this has to be shit tier FUD because nobody could possibly be this dumb.

That's the best you got, honey?
I wrote an entire post refuting every single of your deluded arguments and you couldn't come up with a single response but instead resort to ad hominem.
This is the average LINK bagholder, believing in memes and fairy tales.

Your posts is useless, you're supposed to tell me which parts are wrong so we can continue the discussion. Name calling gets you nowhere.

I’m not sure if there’s a better source of this speculation but I just searched and found this on telegram. Basically, he’s being asked about the reputation system and answers but says it’s kind of abstract at this point. Image 1/3

Attached: E1E52BFB-F6EC-48E5-9955-7D67676A2555.png (640x1136, 225K)

you wrote an entire post of brainlet gibberish and everybody but you can see it for what it is. you're too deluded to reason with. you fail to understand the absolute basics of how Chainlink works so there's no point spoonfeeding you.

Attached: 25C4CFF3-FB0D-42BE-B8EB-C9F14E5DA13B.png (640x1136, 225K)

$1000 EOY
>Pic related.

Attached: 1526220482039.jpg (828x724, 183K)

>For SWIFT to be using Chainlink, this means that all of the banks would have their own node
>Then what is the point of Chainlink? The node selection is useless, the reputation is useless, the consensus is useless. Basically every single advantage of Chainlink is rendered useless if SWIFT wanted to operate this way.

Chainlink is a NETWORK of decentralized oracles. SWIFT's nodes will not be the only nodes on the network. You clearly haven't even managed to grasp even the most elementary aspects of this project and yet here you are, posting in a high IQ Chainlink discussion without the faintest hint of self awareness.

3/3

Attached: 4C9EF4E7-5831-456E-BC40-16F50031266F.png (640x1136, 239K)

"Then what is the point of Chainlink? The node selection is useless, the reputation is useless, the consensus is useless."

You seriously lack critical thinking. Please stop talking ffs

Another

Attached: 47117162-092C-42CF-8ACF-59AA78558FE1.png (640x1136, 236K)

Attached: 62741AB0-119F-4A96-9FA9-EF1DE7047D6E.png (640x1136, 276K)

You're inventing new arguments and moving the goalposts every time you're given a new bit of information (which is frequently, given you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about), while simultaneously asking for more of that information.
In that, this discussion is useful for you, but not for anyone else. Read the fucking whitepaper.

Whats the date of those shots?

>you're too deluded to reason with
> you fail to understand the absolute basics of how Chainlink
HAHAHAHAHAH I hope this is bait, I asked you several times to provide source for your bullshit and you just say "lol DYOR read whitepaper bro XD".
Fucking subhuman linkie.

>Chainlink is a NETWORK of decentralized oracles.
Yes

>SWIFT's nodes will not be the only nodes on the network.
Yes

>You clearly haven't even managed to grasp even the most elementary aspects of this project and yet here you are
Dude I just agreed with you, I don't see the problem. Chainlink is a network and SWIFT nodes are not the only ones on that network. I don't understand how is this relevant to anything I wrote before?

My point was: If SWIFT will be using their own nodes for fetching data (centralized because they own them), what is the point of using Chainlink if they don't take the advantages that actually come from using the network like it was intended (random node selection, use those nodes to determine one truth to be written to the blockchain) ?
Might as well use Oraclize desu

lol, can you people come up with actual arguments?
Jeez, I have to reply to so many people yet there are no relevant arguments in sight.

Ok so no arguments from you either? Oh man, you're making me sad.

They vary. I’m just using the search function in tg and unfortunately the dates aren’t easily findable. I can’t be bothered to do more.

For the second time, SWIFT is not a singular entity.
You're leaning on this Molyneux garbage pretty heavy given that you, also, are not putting forth arguments -- there is no cohesion or rationality in sight. This is sophistry for its own sake. You're ignorance is such that you're arguing "but what if the car decided to use a horse?"
Go learn what SWIFT is, go read the whitepaper.
Fucking loser

Thanks for digging this up, user.

>"Last I checked, we won't be using a private repo for the contract development."

Maybe I'm missing something here but Thomas seems to be saying they won't use a private repo for just the contract development, which would make sense because the contracts are mostly going to be created by companies/users anyways. It doesn't say anything about a private repo for the reputation and consensus code not existing.

you are worse than astrofag. you are becoming a cancer. Stop replying and go find a shallow puddle to drown yourself in.

But that's just a single example, and I already told you that it's a unique one because SWIFT is not a single bank.
Then I said OK, lets say this is true but then what's the point - no answer.
I asked what about other companies that don't operate like SWIFT - again, no answer.

The reason for my Molyneux garbage is because you people are twice as worse.
Muh $1000 EOY, muh Sergey will save us from wagecucking, muh connect the dots, muh 100 quadrillion API industry.
Never a single fucking solid fact that can confirm any of the rumors. You try to argue against this and you get called names, well fuck you too.

(You)

No problem and I agree. I think the claim that there is no private repo for the reputation and consensus elements are a bastardization of this. The other screen is posted with Rory talking about the Go repository is vague too. He’s not definitely saying that there aren’t other private repos.

Attached: SE.png (815x99, 6K)

Nice

>If SWIFT will be using their own nodes for fetching data (centralized because they own them), what is the point of using Chainlink if they don't take the advantages that actually come from using the network like it was intended (random node selection, use those nodes to determine one truth to be written to the blockchain) ?

The point of using Chainlink is that it can function as either a centralized oracle or a decentralized oracle network depending on how you decide to utilize it, so it innately offers far more value than any other oracle solution out there in the same way that a smart phone is both a phone and a computer with internet connection, so it innately has more value than a landline phone. If SWIFT has no use for decentralized oracles, they have that option with Chainlink, and if they do have a use for decentralized oracles, they have that option with Chainlink.

However, SWIFT unambiguously has a use for a decentralized oracle network because THEY'RE THE ONES WHO ASKED CHAINLINK TO DO A FUCKING POC IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Exactly, I don't see where this "no private repos" talk is coming from. It's gotta just be FUD.

> I was wrong about something but I changed my argument
> I was wrong about something so I changed my argument
> I was wrong about something but I changed my argument
This analysis, at least, is correct!

Earlier in the conversation you literally couldn't see how a SWIFT member bank could be a client and operator, which is one of the foundational backbones of the fucking token (you didn't even KNOW WHAT SWIFT WAS before that). Again, this conversation is useful to you because you're getting educated, but you're shitting up a thread specifically mentioned in the OP to be for people who KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.

If you want to make fun of holders for relying on conjecture and memes and being optimistic go for it, but don't pretend for a fucking second that you know the first goddamn thing about this project, because your attempts have been genuinely embarrassing.

you know this turd burglar is only here to frustrate you and get you to discuss nonsense topics, right? his intent is to derail the thread and you let him.

Attached: Marko_the_taxdodger.png (378x272, 143K)

damn dude, you have been repeatedly BTFO this entire thread, get some self awareness and read about the damn project holy shit

>However, SWIFT unambiguously has a use for a decentralized oracle network because THEY'RE THE ONES WHO ASKED CHAINLINK TO DO A FUCKING POC IN THE FIRST PLACE.
If SWIFT wanted to only communicate with their own nodes, then Chainlink didn't have to have an ICO (linkies like to say how LINK is a SWIFT project through and through). And if SWIFT's implementation would work like that, that'd be called a distributed oracle network, not decentralized.
Lets not forget PSD2 open banking which would make sense for public nodes to participate in the banking network.

>> I was wrong about something but I changed my argument
Nice strawman you faggot. I never said I was wrong. I said hypothetically lets say you're right, then why X and Y. And you had no answer for X and Y which invalidated your original argument.

>which is one of the foundational backbones of the fucking token
What does being client and operator have to do with the foundation of an ERC20 token?
I didn't get educated at all, all I see is delusion and larps that you cannot back up with real facts.
Let me know if you can provide a source for all of the bullshit you wasted my time with.

I don't know man, I don't see the BTFO part. All I see is lack of relevant arguments and ad hominem (btw you're doing it right now).
Talk about self awareness lol.

>If SWIFT wanted to only communicate with their own nodes, then Chainlink didn't have to have an ICO (linkies like to say how LINK is a SWIFT project through and through).

This is the last (You) I'm giving you. You are too far gone. I wish you the best of luck, seriously.

I know, I just like calling him a retard and a faggot, cuz he is. In a world full of lies, telling the truth can be a revolutionary act.

Just stop user. This is not high IQ discussion. Breathe some fresh air. Meditate.

I've put about 3 months of my earnings into link.

If this project meets its aims then that's just great. If it doesn't, then for me those 3 months were more than worth the gamble to one day be financially independent (assuming adoption). I see peoples heartache over this project every day, just be fucking patient and see how it all unfolds.

Put in what you can, step away from it and get on with your life, your mind will thank you for it.