Reasonable Chainlink FUD thread

It would have to give incentive for running a node, provide reputation, and utilize adapters for extensibility in order to really compete with Chainlink.

Also maybe I'm being a brainlet here but what has your second point got to do with anything?

Surely supply and demand will dictate the price. If LINK is Staked and held up within an action, then surely there is much less LINK on Binance (& other markets). This would mean price is driven up in those markets?

You are correct, OP get your shit together man, use your logic.

Attached: 1526309489700.jpg (312x312, 51K)

It just gets flat out replaced by something. I mean its 2 fucking guys and does anyone believe assblaster isn't a larp? Anything could be the leading oracle solution honestly, if you think it has to be LINK you are deluding yourself. How are we supposed to know what the big jews will use?

link locked in contracts are out of supply

See you tomorrow, user.

Riddle user here. If you've been around since the early days of Link you should understand the marketcap is a meme. Link is not a currency it is a token. All Link not being bought at any given time is out of the supply determining the price. High price is in the interest of everyone involved in the network and project as a whole. Mainnet being far away is a real concern. I personally believe we are 3-5 months away from the mainnet. Even Sergey doesn't know for sure. I'm not concerned about IOTA, I see no concrete reason. The truth is out there. B for I believe. Accumulate ChainLink.

Attached: fujitsu.jpg (638x359, 93K)

>It just gets flat out replaced by something.
It would have to provide some greater market incentive for node operators than CL.
>I mean its 2 fucking guys
This could be fixed with an easy update to the site. Valid to outsiders, but simple to resolve.
>does anyone believe assblaster isn't a larp?
No one outside of biz will get this.
>Anything could be the leading oracle solution honestly
Again, market incentive.
>How are we supposed to know what the big jews will use?
This will make anyone outside of biz disregard everything you've said.

Why would they work with chainlink instead of developing their own solutions?

We don't even know what kind of returns the nodes will have. So idk where you are getting these node incentives from when we literally don't know what they will be.

> Why would a car company not just make their own roads?
Wow that's a good question user. Gold star for you.

Attached: 1507266147226.png (800x729, 48K)

fujitsu.com/global/about/resources/news/press-releases/2017/0605-01.html

>mainnet is still very far away (10+ months) and we will miss the biggest gains of our lives while holding LINK which will be stagnating

they're well along with the consensus/reputation code in private repos. we know for a fact they have private repos and they've been working on this problem since before ethereum even existed, so there's no reason to believe they'd put off the most important part until now. even if that haven't written a single line of code for this they know exactly how they intend for it to work

>staked LINK isn't actually counted out of the circulating supply so there will never be a chance for us to reach huge price numbers ($10+)

see
>IOTA provides a better solution

again, LINK is way ahead of the competition here as they've been working on the issue for years. this is like worrying about mobius or aeternity having a better solution, and if you were holding IOTA or any other coin that ostensibly offers a solution you'd rightfully be shitting your pants about LINK

honestly i don't have any fears about LINK simply because of how deeply in bed it is with big business and how it offers to integrate with legacy systems rather than destroy them. short of sergey choking to death on a big mac i have no fears, and even then ari juels could pick up the pieces

Attached: 1526867440506.jpg (750x403, 85K)

Hyperconnected API economy

That's the idiotic"masternode" way of thinking, wanting guaranteed return figures. The returns will be based on whatever contract writers are willing to pay for decentralized data. We know they'll have to pay for data with LINK, there's the incentive.

IOTA would rather build their own highway instead of using the Indian shitting street called Chainlink.

>again, LINK is way ahead of the competition here as they've been working on the issue for years.
2 man team. One is a philosophy student.

The chainlink team are a complete mess right now since the news of SmartContract being refused a TM.
Rory is losing his shit in the telegram over FUD and threatening to ban people suddenly, if they had no genuine concerns about FUD they wouldn't care, but the cracks are begining to show and they are panicking. In response to questions about the refusal, both Rory and Thomas are refusing to answer questions in the Slack about it, despite being active in Telegram. He made one snippy response to someone about the refusal and just said "it's unrelated". Now he is no longer talking about it.....

This should tell you everything about this project. They are fucking scared and they should be.

Sell all your links guys.

Attached: Telegram1.jpg (1320x1181, 230K)

^ i can't read this post or the one above it

Aren’t reputation and consensus in the scope of the Chainlink node though? And even if they have it all planned out that’s still a lot of work for such a small team.

I don't get what they plan to do with the $32M they raised in the ICO. Almost every shitcoin has a dev team of 50+ people, but the smartcontract revolution only has a handful because of .... ?

Because they don't need more. The project team is picked according to needs, not budget. The more people you have, the more overhead and it could make efficiency suffer.

Chainlink has a good team, but faster teams are starting to appear on the crypto stage, like Iota Qubit. New European Gdpr might affect all the blockchains.
Development in the pivotal tracker seems slowed down since Friday. People asking for aprox. estimated timelines get blasted off the Slack. Main network could last other 18 months. This is uncharted territory and I still have gaith in the project though, but is a long shot.

Japanese Bankers Association will employ a Fujitsu cloud service-based blockchain platform based on the Hyperledger Fabric. Finnish Government ICT-centre Valtori also develops on the same platform. Also look into MasterCards patents regarding blockchain. SecureKey is working on HyperLedger as well. Northern Trust is something I haven't had the time to research but it looks very promising usecase for CL.

Not everything will use Chainlink. Especially with CL so far from its mainnet.

ChainLink is the first project of it's kind whose goal is to provide a decentralized oracle service.

Ethereum is currently worth $1,000 because it offers trustless smart-contracts. Smart-contracts are a way to program the money to do things that's guarenteed. An example would be Bob sends Alice 500 RCN instantly when Alice sends Bob 500 REQ.

But there is a major issue with smart-contracts. Smart-contracts can only access blockchain data. In order to access 3rd party (stock prices, gas prices,weather information, etc) they need an oracle. An oracle is a service that converts 3rd party data into smart-contract usable data. An example would be let's say Bob wanted to make a smart-contract bet with Alice on the outcome of the last superbowl. The oracle that provides the game data would pull the ending score information from Yahoo, Google, NFL.com, etc then send the information to Bob's smart-contract.

The problem here is that the oracle is centralizied, and both Bob and Alice would have to trust this single oracle, which could be hacked, to be providing correct data, and because of that there is no reason to be using a guarenteed trustless smart-contract if the data is not trustless.

This is where ChainLink comes in. ChainLink will offer decentralized oracles that provide trustless data. With this system if Bob and Alice wanted to create that smart-contract they could pull information from multiple LINK nodes, and confirm they are all providing the same accurate data. These LINK nodes themselves could then pull each of their information from Yahoo, Google, NFL, etc. Because the nodes are staked with LINK tokens, if one node is providing incorrect data they would risk losing a portion of their staked tokens. LINK nodes providing correct data will be paid in more LINK tokens.

I hope this explanation clears up what ChainLink does and why it has a massive use case.

ChainLink's testnet was just released and it's mainnet is scheduled to release later this year.

Attached: PicsArt_05-18-04.53.31.png (1536x2048, 2.29M)

>i can read their minds, and this should tell you everything you need to know in order to market sell all your LINK

Cancer should be pissed that tripfags get compared to it

All of these projects need off-chain data sources, to my knowledge CL is the only solution for this on Hyperledger

Ironic that that cancer starts with CAN when most the time theres nothing you CAN do about it. Cancer doesn't care about fuck all you loser.

This is literally a super shitty rewrite of the posts I made months ago that turned into pasta.

You posted the exact same thing in the other thread.
This is just nonsense. What i think is happening is your inner monoloug is a weak crybaby. So when reading it thats how you hear it in your head.

you bowling pin looking faggot.

Depends what Thomas meant. I would assume that the scope of Chainlink nodes are their independent functions and not the systems that exist outside of the nodes themselves, and the reputation and consensus mechanisms appear to be just that.

Node responses are aggregated via a consensus mechanism and a global response is returned and the reputation system allows users to evaluate oracle performance holistically.

From the whitepaper:

>Off-chain, ChainLink initially consists of a network of oracle nodes connected to the
Ethereum network, and we intend for it to support all leading smart contract networks.
These nodes independently harvest responses to off-chain requests. As we explain below, their individual responses are aggregated via one of several possible consensus mechanisms into a global response that is returned to a requesting contract USER-SC.

>The Reputation System proposed for ChainLink would record and publish user ratings of oracle providers and nodes, offering a means for users to evaluate oracle performance holistically.

Reasonable Chainlink fud is oxymoronic at this point.

So? Not everyone reads every single thread. Or do you not realise that? Gotta get the message out bro.

^ i can't read this post

FAT
A
T

So IOTA > Link or what?

His comment literally said they're not developing the contracts privately.

Average age of a male x 365 x price of a big mac

That oughta clear some things up for you

You’re doing the lords work. God I hope you’re right

Is the Hyperledger connection relaly true? Consensus disappointed us in this regard.

There are reputation contracts for individual oracle service providers, yes, but there is also a reputation system that functions across the entire Chainlink network.

The consensus protocol is not a contract. Read the white paper.

The fact that sergey was doubtful a decentralized oracle network was even possible in a presentation only a few months before deciding to launch LINK ico.
He doubted the theory behind a consensus/incentive model using 'digital tokens', which is the whole point of link.
Seems like they didn't have a solution for the consensus model, but didn't want to miss the ico frenzy and are just hoping they solve it along the way.
He made it sound more of a challenge than many people here seem to realize, and the fact that it still isn't done, is a worry. The most IMPORTANT bit of the project is probably still just theory at this point. I believe they are trying, but LINK is more of a long-shot then we think.
Ib4 muh private repo

youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2934&v=ytv8U0bejPA

Watch the last 3 minutes

Anyone with a half brain will realize that Chainlink actually has a very good shot at succeeding. You just have to come in terms on the fact that this will take time.

Just like how most people who held Bitcoin at the early stages of it mostly all sold it off, whereas only those who just forgot about their investment for a few years and came back were those who became millionaires.

This can go either way, but it's really just a waiting game.

>Bockchain

>there is also a reputation system that functions across the entire Chainlink network.
No there isn't. That would be centralized. That's the whole purpose of allowing multiple reputation providers to exist is so that there wouldn't be a single source of reputation.
>The consensus protocol is not a contract. Read the white paper.
Yes it is. Chainlink isn't creating its own blockchain, nodes will come to consensus on-chain, in a contract. Read page 12, Initial Solution: In-contract Aggregation.