ChainLink Dev Dump?

These are the specs and features hyperledgers custom in-house Oracle solution will have. He entire document shits on the current Oracle solutions, chainlink included.

It says right here that it's not suitable for their use.

Find where they said that, oh wait they didnt!

It never specifically mentions chainlink lmao

Hyperledger is a single organization. If they chose to use a custom oracle, then so be it. There will still be chainlink oracles for every blockchain, brainlet

*breathes in*

BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

linktards BTFO. Please make a separate thread detailing this

Yeah it specifically reviews chainlink along with all the other Oracle solutions currently available and lists the pros and cons

Just give up. Chainlink is legit product but there is not any big partnerships atm.

is this not opensourced? chainlink is a stupid scam
who would buy a token to use this product and why would chainlink bow to a bunch of neets who bought these scam tokens
there is no reason not even legal why chainlink would honor this plan

It's true though. Look up what smart contracts are; they basically cut out middlemen like banks; let alone middlemen of middlemen like Swift.

Those cons insinuate the only "problem" is lack of adoption. The main net isn't even functional yet. Kys brainlet

You're gonna get BTFO when main met goes live and you can see the network traffic. They've been waiting since September 2017 to announce partnerships. Just saying.

>decentralized oracle networks (...) are unsuited for permissioned networks
Lol, this is straight up bullshit.
Swift literally paid Sergey to spend a year developing around Hyperledger, and he demo'd the result at Sibos.

Developing privacy features is on Chainlink's roadmap isn't it.

It doesn't matter dude, that document was created in October of 2017. They've already made their own oracle, they're not putting their entire project on standby waiting for muh decentralized Oracle privacy.

Read page 21 of the whitepaper. The Chainlink network can ensure confidentiality by using SGX.

It's a large chunk of the whitepaper.

>They've already made their own oracle
Oh wow, a whole oracle? Damn, Link btfo.

I've already read the muh huwyte paypuh bro. Intel SGX implementation isn't until further down the line, not to mention it's known exploits

its fixed tho

Well you can sell your LINK then. I know I won't be selling mine.

>Intel SGX implementation isn't until further down the line
That's because the finished product itself isn't until further down the line.

>not to mention it's known exploits
SGX is in full development.

The FUD is unreal. But whatever. All I see is there is one and only one project that's working with SWIFT. And that's ChainLink.

Stay poor faggot

If SWIFT doesn't want to go bankrupt they WILL have to adopt new technology. They're already in a tight spot, being the first adopters of smart contracts would help them immensely and they know it.

thanks

This. In that IBM document they listed what they see as LINK's cons in their eyes. They listed
>requires a lot of user engagement (a lot of nodes)
this one is not a problem since we have at least a thousand NEETs on this board alone who want to run nodes
>privacy concerns for data-sensitive networks
this one is not a problem either since LINK is gonna use Intel SGX, which is in full development and has the exploits every cretin loves to harp on about patched in a day after having them discovered

LINK has no cons at all. I'm sure they're already aware of it since this document was written so long ago.

wut.
This is not at all what smartcontracts do.
It actually makes sense that CL wouldn't be a good fit for their implimented version of 'secure blockchains'
Their implimentation is retarded and requires the use of oracles for it to be practical.
Yes, SGX, TownCrier
They have their own oracle, their customers hate it's limited functionality. Their oracle supports plugins written in Go.
I'm not going to break this down for you.

>wut.
>This is not at all what smartcontracts do.
Yes, it is.
They're contracts that execute automatically.
That means they cut out middlemen that execute/confirm/record/enforce/... contracts under the current system.
This includes notaries, attorneys, insurance companies, banks, courts, ...

I misunderstood what you were saying.
I agree, but perhaps I don't agree with the level of job displacement that will result; at least not to the level that you do.

They have 20k people who want to run a node and it isn't even well known and people don't realize how profitable it is
So yeah the User engagement shouldn't be a problem....

Oh I'm just referring to the raw principle behind it.

Adoption of smart contracts can (and very likely will) be very gradual, right alongside legacy systems.

Don't forget that in 2018 banks are basically being forced to open up their internal APIs to third parties.
There will be no shortage of source material for free agent Chainlink nodes to exploit.

>They have their own oracle, their customers hate it's limited functionality.
Did you read that in the emails? Can you provide more details. Cheers

How theorerically would those open bank API's be harnessed by joe node operator? For what use I mean? Curious if you can even think up some hypothetical contractual use of that data.

>They've been waiting since September 2017 to announce partnerships. Just saying.

J Cole went double platinum with no features

The fudders are getting more and more desperate I see.

Did you only get screenshots? Wanting a copy of this document dor references, they locked it out before I saved it.

how desperate are you bagholders? This shit is flimsy as fuck. Chainlink is gonna be worthless soon.

Passively by bidding on contracts that specify the use of such bank APIs, actively by creating contracts that use such bank APIs.

>when fudders use fomo as fud because the fud they produce is so low quality

Right.. But for what USE.

Read up on what smart contracts are.

chainlinknodes.com/sergey-nazarov-speak-bitcoin-ethereum-blockchain-superconference/

"The topic of his talk has yet to be announced on the conference site. However, it will most likely relate to the importance of the ChainLink
oracle project and the potential of smart contracts as a disrupting force in the financial, real estate, and insurance industries."

It better be on that topic, Sergey, it fucking better be.

...

The last time this wallet moved coins LINK went 4-5x within 60 days. Insider getting ready for the bullish news coming. Good for them, good for us. That wallet is still holding 80% of what it initially started with, nowhere near a "dump"

Prove

how many linksters do i need? currently only have 3k ~10% of portfolio, rest is in xlm
am i going to make it?

>79 days ago
>November 28th

You won't make it. XLM is already floating at the top of it's marketcap, because of the sheer amount of coin in circulation. The best it will ever do is 3x

>linkies are so deluded they think a simple two word reply from a community manager who doesnt know shit is proof of anything
LMAO
DELUDED

What are you talking about retard they've been dumping in chunks this entire time. Look at their dump wallet and the dates! The screenshot in pic doesn't fit nearly all the transactions

etherscan.io/token/0x514910771af9ca656af840dff83e8264ecf986ca?a=0xe600e6009be4dbd8b9cf932027b9d26607cab55b

He wasn't wrong by any means though, you cultist faggpt

here
my.mixtape.moe/aabzwb.docx

wtf are you talking about? I'm on eitherscan and i dont see in out binance

AAAAAAAARRRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH YOU NIGGEEEEAAAAARRRRR MY LINKS

etherscan.io/address/0xe600e6009be4dbd8b9cf932027b9d26607cab55b#tokentxns

It's a wallet holding 2 million linkies. The original wallet they came from sent out linkies 79 days ago.

Dude u can even click the address it was sent to and it tells you it's binance

Thx Sergey

oopps.

how do we know for sure thats not someone who go it on the ICO?

Because if you follow the chain of transfers, it's one of the untouchable LINK wallets, mentioned in the whitepaper.
etherscan.io/address/0xf37c348b7d19b17b29cd5cfa64cfa48e2d6eb8db#tokentxns

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
NOT LIKE THIS
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I never saw anyone mention this, but on my wallet transfers it doesn't show the target address as "Binance". It shows my bare deposit address.
Isn't "binance" binance's cold/hot wallet? Why would anyone send crypto there? It won't be credited to your account.

>one of the untouchable LINK wallets, mentioned in the whitepaper.
The white paper doesn't mention any wallet, and no wallet was ever stated to be "untouchable" in any other way.

as a dev
even if I sell now it doesn't mean I wont buy back in the future (when the price is lower)
so I don't see the problem if I ultimately buy back the amount I sold (and more)

I still believe in the project
its just the smart thing to do

> buying ERC20 tokens and thinking they'll matter
These are people who litteraly couldn't even be bothered to make their own shit coin

There are 350 millions of untouchable link reserved for institutions.

>thanks Jonny
>I appreciate what you do
Plausible deniability. Not saying anything, but implying it. Rory wants people to believe what Jonny says, but that isnt what's really going on.

They could start distributing that at any time too, not untouchable at all.
And I'm pretty sure they still have 350 million left.

>They could start distributing that at any time too
Distributing to Binance?

see

Who says they distributed even 1 token for institutions?

Also, going through Binance is a very good way to obscure the trail.
No need for us to know where those tokens are going if they're indeed going to staffers or institutions.

>implying it is a more likely explanation, than devs dumping their tokens on you and buying tickets to Bahamas.
>what is Occam's razor

If they wanted to obscure the trail of the tokens (which is very plausible), going through binance is by far the simplest option.

...

Comfy

Why would a honest startup want to hide their trail of coins?

So they don't reveal their partnerships before the NDA is lifted, how many there are and how much each would get

Because the recipients deserve some privacy.
Wouldn't want hordes of shitposters trying to guess which wallet is Rory's, for instance.

Doubly so for institutional recipients.

Lol wow it is realler than I thought this still makes no sense though because Sergey would be a fool to make a public appearence if it was this obvious that they have begun an exit scam, maybe they are just putting link on the market because us iron hodlers wont drop bags LMFAO

Pretty sure it's a case for IRS and SEC. I will write them an email and tip them off about possible securities laundering and tax evasion.
If the transactions aren't a scam it will all be fine, if it is, I want that fat fuck behind bars.

Same reason they're not (allowed to) reveal the names of institutional node operators and institutional users before the mainnet is launched.

Any serious corporation takes great care of their public image, and do not want to take unnecessary risks that could harm the brand or integrity of the corporation. And in the event that ChainLink fucks up and fails to deliver, the corporations that were attached to the project remain unnamed and undamaged.

Anyone who's ever been in big business knows this is standard shit.

Like I said, we should get IRS and SEC to check on them. Better safe than sorry.

Lol, the IRS and SEC know exactly how much Sergey has.
The token allocation was plastered all over the website for months.
1B tokens total
35% for public sale
35% for nodes
30% for development.

>The owner of this token transferred it to an exchange
>I suspect foul play

Yes, I'm sure the IRS and SEC will take your request very, very seriously. Go ahead.

The devs being completely silent is a case for securities fraud. You can't just sell people securities, do nothing for months, then start suspicious movements through a chain of wallets.
I will report it as possible securities fraud.

This is some 10/10 trolling.

If you're actually serious, I'm so sorry.

>Have an active community manager and updates
>Do nothing

Pick one

Is that really Rory's username? Sibos restroom attendant?

Americans weren't even allowed to enter the ICO

>Have an active community manager
Where? Some fuck on a private slack, who refuses to answer direct questions isn't a "community manager".
>updates
Where?
I'm dead serious and I guess you forgot your funny internet money is now being regulated by the government and all the same laws apply.

Let him dream, user. He's very excited.

Go to the Gitter, the Sack, or even the fucking chat window on their homepage, and ask any practical or technical question and you'll get a detailed response within the day.
Especially questions regarding nodes, which is the main focus of development right now.