Chainlink is the future

If you're running a smart contract that will automatically execute and possibly transfer amounts of money in the millions or billions, why would you trust a node that will suffer zero financial penalty if it gives incorrect answers?

because collaterals are ultimately stupid if youre trusting on a centralized source to say which collateral is wrong or right.
>gets payed $1 million in collateral
>turns out it was correct the whole time
>"hey give me my money back"
>"no, fuck off"
>lets consult a centralized source to see whose right
You already have penalties with contracts

sorry, will just use conman
youtube.com/watch?v=oA_q1OC-Aos&t=882

Bought in 10,000 in 2017 for a ACB of 40 cents CAD. Over $50,000 in gains. Chainlink has already made me rich.

>he unironically cites Faketoshi instead of the whitepaper
lol, lost

how can the oracle pay a penalty if they havent posted any collateral?

>because collaterals are ultimately stupid if youre trusting on a centralized source

why would you trust a centralized source which suffers no penalty if they provide incorrect information?

that's all fine with a normal, non automatically executing contract. if the centralized source provides incorrect information (which they do, from time to time) then you can just ignore that bad data. with a smart contract that's not an option

Yes
youtube.com/watch?v=8DAwDWRJhaM&t=154

>seems trustworthy
>decentralized oracles for the purpose of eliminating trust
Do you know where you are right now?

whose going to determine what information is correct or incorrect?
>just medianize multiple nodes
thats just removing outliers from an average
every solution chainlink provides is inferior to tokenless contracts in everyway, hence why there still is not technical whitepaper for the collateral system

the token is utterly useless

Over $50,000 *CAD in gains. Fixed.

Attached: 1587022385969.jpg (225x225, 8.28K)

>been crabbing for years
>gonna make us rich
delusional

What else has pumped this hard you fucking cunt

read the white paper

answers that deviate from the others will be discarded and penalized

if there was no token and no collateral, you could flood the system with incorrect answers and eventually make a majority. would cost nothing and you'd face no financial penalty.

>answers that deviate from the others will be discarded and penalized
yes, removed outliers. Thats it. You are just taking an average, and disregarding outliers which you can do tokenlessly.
So the average is the correct answer youre saying? What if the average is not? What if one source is the correct and deviates from the others and it can prove this and gets penalized anyway?
>no no no, just trust the node with highest number of link tokens
so a centralized source.

>read the whitepaper
no, fuck you. use YOUR whitepaper to back your claims. Its not even a technical whitepaper

>flood the system with incorrect answers
if theres an average already you can disregard outliers with no collateral system.
>no, just penalize sources .001 off the average
so youre saying the average is the true centralized right answer?
>....

See:
>
if there was no token and no collateral, you could flood the system with incorrect answers and eventually make a majority. would cost nothing and you'd face no financial penalty.

Try again in coherent english this time.

>if there was no token and no collateral, you could flood the system with incorrect answers
except if you establish an average you can disregard outliers
>noooo just create 500 new nodes to make new average to fuck the system
then dont have so many nodes
>...

>read the whitepaper
again, fuck you. Defend your shit token with YOUR whitepaper

>incorrect answers
whose going to determine whats correct besides a centralized average?
>well just establish a correct source with contracts
good bye LINK

>except if you establish an average you can disregard outliers

Retard, if the oracles are bad then the average you establish will be bad.

>then dont have so many nodes

It doesn't matter how many nodes. The problem is if you are chosing nodes that aren't collateralised, there's a good chance that the average node will be bad.

Again, if you're making a smart contract that will settle to millions you definitely don't want an oracle to not be collateralised.

The oracle runner could be bribed by the other side of the smart contract, and in general has little to lose if they provide bad data.

You're starting to ramble now. Maybe it's time to go to bed. You don't understand smart contracts and that's fine, but you should at least notice that people who do understand them are increasingly using chainlink, the industry standard.

One simple rule if you want to make money: don't buy anything that's being shilled in biz.
Link is a special shitcoin to avoid since it's being shilled 24/7.

how are you going to establish an average
>have a bunch of nodes that give the right answer
Which one is the right answer?
>the average of them

>The problem is if you are chosing nodes that aren't collateralised, there's a good chance that the average node will be bad.
Why? Why not have regular contracts. How are you going to determine which ones get collateralized?
>those deviate from the average
what if the one that deviates is right? What if the collateral is not big enough penalty? Why cant you disregard outliers from established average?

>starting to ramble
nah, i think i just proved why LINK is 100% useless and youre coping.

>Again, if you're making a smart contract that will settle to millions you definitely don't want an oracle to not be collateralised.
bigger penalties can be settled through contracts

Also, what if the source is right and already gets penalized. Repeat here

>how are you going to establish an average
>Which one is the right answer?

A SC asks oracles in the CL network for a value, say ETHUSD. Each oracle asks one or multiple data sources/APIs for ETHUSD and provides that answer. The CL network considers all the answers, takes any that deviate significantly from the average provided and takes the average of the remaining answers as the answer to provide to the smart contract

>Why? Why not have regular contracts.

Try again in coherent english please

>How are you going to determine which ones get collateralized?

Try again in coherent english please

>what if the one that deviates is right?

That would suck but you're going to have to provide more detail if you think that's something thats particularly likely to happen.

>What if the collateral is not big enough penalty?

Again, not coherent English.

What if the collateral is not enough to pay the penalty? By definition the oracle would need enough collateral to pay the penalty.

>Why cant you disregard outliers from established average?

Because there is no such thing as an established average. What is the established average for ETHUSD? There is none. You ping the CL network. It gives you one answer for ETHUSD. You ping it again a few minutes later, the answer could be different. Obviously, the idea of there being an established answer is complete nonsense and the fact that you even suggest this shows you have no idea what you're talking about.

>you should at least notice that people who do understand them are increasingly using chainlink, the industry standard.

>le appeal to authority bias
SWIFT was a competition
Google was a blogpost
Oracle demoted Fernando who had link bags
EY is (pic)
Many of the crypto projects just provide feeds and dont utlize the link token

i know this is hard to hear, but your appeal to authority is complete shit

Attached: 1589231415357-1.jpg (1080x2160, 555.2K)

>bigger penalties can be settled through contracts

You mean a real world contract settled by lawyers? That entirely defeats the purpose of a smart contract. The whole purpose of a smart contract is that it is trustless and decentralized. You have faith that you put your money into this thing and it will do what you expect it to do, based purely on what it is coded to do.

no, Tellor is the future

>des that answer. The CL network considers all the answers, takes any that deviate significantly from the average provided and takes the average of the remaining answers as the answer to provide to the smart contract
if you have an average already then deviate the outliers. Why do you need a penalty then?

>Try again in coherent english please
this is maximum cope you know

>how are you going to establish an average
>have a bunch of nodes that give the right answer
Which one is the right answer?
Improve whitepaper comprehension.
Real question is: why does this anonymous frogposter care?

I'm talking about the vast array of DeFI products that are ALREADY using chainlink.

See here:
defipulse.com/

Such a kike answer

Hans you need to practice your English. I literally cannot decipher parts of your post.

>if you have an average already then deviate the outliers. Why do you need a penalty then?

You need a penalty to ensure that the average you get is actually good. Oracle providers have skin in the game and have something to lose if they provide incorrect data. They are incentivised to provide the right answer.

A penalty is IMPOSSIBLE in a smart contract if collateral is not posted.

chainlink is going to use contracts instead of collateral hence why Sergey has KYC now, you brainlet

And contracts do have better penalties covered. Here is literal smart contract developer.
People just want to connect to the blockchain fren. Smart contracts or regular contracts, the value is in blockchain

Attached: dont you me.jpg (1080x607, 251.97K)

and none of them utilize the actual tokenomics of LINK at all. judt the network

Again, no. Penalties are NOT POSSIBLE in a smart contract if you don't post collateral.

That's because staking has not been implemented yet. Once it is, linkpool, fiews etc. will move to staked nodes