Jonny Huxtable talking out of his ass and getting BTFO

You can only hide scams for so long.

Attached: Screenshot 2018-03-14 at 6.58.34 PM.png (1260x912, 444K)

I can’t believe how long the link shills have lasted. People can’t possibly be this stupid.
There’s a reason link is ONLY shilled on biz. Take two seconds to think about that fact.

Funny how this thread isn't getting any replies. Linkies have no idea how to research their investments and would rather ignore facts than discuss them.

>It's pointless because there's no verification
There is verification. A premium opt-in certification system is part of the plan.

>adding trust
>nodes that have built up their certifications can now more easily manipulate data
see a problem there? Don't you see how doing this with confidence when dealing with expensive contracts is impractical?

- -silence --
That's what I thought
No one answers your thread because you're a brainlet

Obviously not, explain it to us.

Wrong answers forfeit their collateral.

You telling me 20 nodes are going to give the same wrong answer?

Dickhead the certifications are issued not built up. Reputation is built up, not certification.
So basically you know nothing, correct?

Can someone with a reddit account post this please, Johnny is fucking up:

"Verification of correctness" comes from chainlink using MULTIPLE data sources to retrieve the information. This is literally addressed in the white paper, page 11. If some of the sources return wrong information, then Link will recognize them as outliers and output the mean of the remaining sources. In order for there to be a failure, in for example a smart contract regarding stocks, then there would literally have to be a breakdown of every single data source used regarding the stock markets.

"If a majority of sources return the identical value a, the function agg returns a; otherwise it returns an error. In this case, provided that a majority (> k/2) sources are functioning correctly, ORACLE will always return a correct value A. Many alternative functions agg can ensure robustness against erroneous data or handle fluctuations in data values over time (e.g, stock prices). For example, agg might discard outliers (e.g., the largest and smallest values ai) and output the mean of the remaining ones."

yes chainlink scam buy mobius sir

Wow how will link ever recover, this guy is posting shit from some brainlet on reddit who has clearly never read a whitepaper in his life. Pack it up boys, sell those 100ks.

>You telling me 20 nodes are going to give the same wrong answer?

>Big company buys tons of linkies
>sets up 20 nodes, 1 node's data is mirrored by the other 19
>each node provides an answer identical or very similar to the other nodes
>Big company's answer is the right answer because consensus
Not hard to understand.

this is not how chainlink works at all

>buy 10000 BTC miners
>manipulate them so the blockchain consensus is that your wallet owns 1000000000000 BTC
why haven't the jews done this?

Attached: 1517961215966.png (553x278, 88K)

>Assuming that majority is honest just because is very insecure.
Assuming that majority is honest when they are incentivised for honestly and are unable to see then answers of other nodes. And compare this system to a single oracle. And pretend like the former system isn't vastly stronger/better/more redundant.
Fuck you for making me go to reddit.

Sybil attacks are specifically addressed in the whitepaper

Enjoy staying poor. Do you think LINK is the only network that relies on a trust based system?

LINK is trustless.

I dont see this happening
Anyone large enough to be a target of such attack will most likely have their own nodes on the network that they communicate with. No need to pull data from random sources

>big company expends huge resources to set up a large number of nodes, anonymously
>company manages to raise the nodes to priority through the reputation system
>company convinces the other contracting parties to use their compromised nodes
>compromised nodes feed incorrect data and execute incorrectly
>other parties say "WTF"
>because everything is recorded on the blockchain you can investigate why 20 different nodes all returned the same incorrect data
>comes out that big company went to all that massive effort just to fuck over other parties on a single contract
>company is sued into oblivion

Great plan, genius. And this whole story is way, way harder than a company surreptitiously starting a centralised oracle service. So a decentralised network is STILL way harder to game.

The plebbit ignored 1) Intel SGX which would hide the data from node operators and 2) the staking, as he gave the POS example. Chainlink could one day add SSL adaptor like jonny said.

Yes. trustless, without using the electricity to power a small city.

This is some weak FUD. Consensus is a form of verification. The only way this system could fail would be if the source of the data was wrong, but it would be wrong for everyone everywhere, not just the chainlink network.

because then your 10000000000 btc would be worth nothing

Reddit is annoying, they're all XRP bag holders. Easily 1000x stinkier than linkies

Guide to growing wealth.
When there are 5 link fud threads running on biz and no shill ones. Buy 1000$ link.

When there are 5 link shill threads running on link and no fud ones. sell 1000$ link.

Convert profit into link.


wtf, did you guys read this? how can we take link serious?

Attached: 1519139566502s.jpg (249x222, 6K)

>wtf, did you guys read this? how can we take link serious?

Thanks, I see it is fud and dump time so I'm already buying. No need to nag more.