I have a hard time understanding why oracles will be the "future" and why everybody thinks this. What chainlink is trying to create is a decentralized oracle, but from what it looks, it's not happening. Chainlink is essentially acting as a trusted 3rd party, individually picking their node operators, and paying them to run their nodes. How is this sustainable? Furthermore, it is highly expensive to validate your LINK. Right now it costs 0.1 link PER REQUEST. On top of that, everytime a node operator wants to fulfill a request, they have to spend a SHIT TON (around $5 depending on gas fees). I'm not FUDING, just trying to have a rational conversation with some LINKERS on why they think it will be the next big thing. It just doesn't add up to me.
Honest Conversation about Chainlink
People really out here thinking chainlink about to save swift from getting killed off huh
Sell signal detected
Its an erc20 scam the sooner you realize the better, doesn't mean price won't go up just realize its all a gamble
You had three Earth orbits of the star commonly known as Sol.
youre obviously a newfag so ill point you in the right direction and you can choose to educate yourself or not
>it is highly expensive to validate your LINK
blog.chain.link
>Chainlink is essentially acting as a trusted 3rd party, individually picking their node operators
medium.com
i'm not going to buy your ripple bags you gay retard
By virtue of Chainlink's potential, Ethereum 2.0's launch will be a bigger day for Link than it will ETH.
>it is highly expensive to validate your LINK
blog.chain.link
Interesting concept, I have read about threshold signatures. From a cost perspective, if it will be CHEAPER to send requests to link, it is completely counterintuitive to the node operators, as they have high gas/electricity fees. they want to obtain link. To there is an inherent conflict of interest that is left unresoled.
medium.com
>Chainlink is essentially acting as a trusted 3rd party, individually picking their node operators
medium.com
Staking only indicates that more people can participate and earn link -- it has nothing to do with the amount of actual nodes running in a network, and the amount of actual decentralized data providers.
Because one of the biggest telecoms in the world says so:
t-systems-mms.com
>Staking only indicates that more people can participate and earn link -- it has nothing to do with the amount of actual nodes running in a network, and the amount of actual decentralized data providers.
oh I see, youre retarded
Also, threshold signatures fix the gas issue
Oracles will be useful, but Chainlink is not. It's just a fashionable meme now, like decentralization was in 2015.
Tellor is the true oracle solution.
>From a cost perspective, if it will be CHEAPER to send requests to link, it is completely counterintuitive to the node operators, as they have high gas/electricity fees. they want to obtain link. To there is an inherent conflict of interest that is left unresoled.
you literally have no idea what youre talking about, yikes.
>Because one of the biggest telecoms in the world says so:
t-systems-mms.com
Large enterprise companies have been wrong about many things and also lose billions of dollars every year making mistakes. Just because a large telecom company wants to participate as a node operator doesn't mean that chainlink's model is automatically validated.
>Interesting concept, I have read about threshold signatures.
you are so painfully pic related. because you can't make yourself magnitudes smarter, just try to be dumber. don't try to understand, just follow.
Apologies, I meant that it will be cheaper for gas fees. But the point still stands that LINK will be expensive to use, because node operators will always want to maximize the amount of LINK they receive, while requesters using the smart contracts will always wants to minimize payments in LINK.
Amazing how a civil conversation can turn rude so quick. Why would you say something like that to a stranger you don't know?
humble phoneposter here can someone photoshop cl themed space elevator in the background and a dirty tellor logo on the old man.
OP is thinking things through...
This facilitates productive conversation and we all learn.
You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a movie. You're asking questions that people figured out a long time ago. You seem to think you know more than everybody else. It's frustrating.
Tellor "The Oracle of DeFi"
>Litterally powers 0 defi applications
have fun bagholding with 0 liquidity faggot
>Chainlink is essentially acting as a trusted 3rd party, individually picking their node operators
This is simply untrue. Anyone can run a node. Anyone can fill jobs. It's up to a node operator to network and actually get jobs. The network is 100% decentralized in the way that competitive business is decentralized. You just have to offer incentive for people to use your node, be it cheaper prices, premium data, a higher staked collateral, etc.
>Furthermore, it is highly expensive to validate your LINK. Right now it costs 0.1 link PER REQUEST
This is of course adjustable and just a completely unimportant number used currently. Anyone can charge any amount they want, and it will likely be in USD value, not LINK value, in the future. The network is not in its final form right now.
>On top of that, everytime a node operator wants to fulfill a request, they have to spend a SHIT TON (around $5 depending on gas fees)
threshold signatures, arbitrum, off chain computation.
Yes, ETH fees technically will cause increased payment prices. But it's not as bad as it could be without the aforementioned solutions. Also chainlink is blockchain agnostic and if ETH isn't the chosen one, thats fine. 52 other blockchains have pledged to use chainlink.
oh and to the gas fees point, everyone is of course assuming that ETH will have scaling solutions at some point.
whether thats a layer 2 solution like zkrollups, matic, OMG, etc. or whether thats ETH 2.0
at some point, ultimately ETH will scale and gas fees will drop substantially and , hopefully, permanently
So asking questions and having an honest conversation about an open source project is frustrating?
I suspect anything that goes against your beliefs are "frustrating" since you are highly emotionally invested inside LINK.
These questions hasn't been answered.
How will chainlink remain decentralized if they are individually cherry picking their node operators?
Why will node operators use LINK if there is an inherent conflict of interest between the people using LINK as an oracle (they would like LINK fees to be cheap), and node operators want them to be high?
Furthermore, currently if you are a dev, you have to hardcode the LINK value when you send a request.
requestId = sendChainlinkRequest(req, 1 * LINK);
At such a high volatility for the token, why on earth would any developer use this? It currently costs 0.1 LINK which is standard across all nodes. If t he price of LINK goes to $10 --> it comes to $1 per request.. probably around 10000x more expensive than traditional data providers.
linkies are so deluded its astounding. All the link threads are a big circle jerk of delusion where 50% of them are new fag redditors that honestly believe in $1000 eoy. Oracles are a problem but there is nothing special about chainlink and there are many competitors popping up. Ones that dont have a massive stack premined waiting to be dumped on by deluded bag holders
>Why would anyone pay money for LINK oracles
Because it's worth it. Chainlink has developed the most robust, tamper-proof oracle design to date. Out of any solution in history.
If you implement a mock-oracle with a single API, you are expecting that API to have complete accuracy and never act maliciously.
If you use multiple APIs, congrats you've basically recreated chainlink but a much shittier version that doesn't scale to infinity because of the decentralized network aspect.
A smart contract that handles millions, billions, trillions of dollars, will very easily shell out 70 cents for a proper data feed to the contract, which ultimately determines the behavior of that contract, and therefore who is profiting from the contract.
>How will chainlink remain decentralized if they are individually cherry picking their node operators?
Anyone can run a node/set up an oracle of nodes. Smart devs just choose the node Chainlink picks
>Why will node operators use LINK if there is an inherent conflict of interest between the people using LINK as an oracle (they would like LINK fees to be cheap), and node operators want them to be high?
Free market. See question 1
>Furthermore, currently if you are a dev, you have to hardcode the LINK value when you send a request. requestId = sendChainlinkRequest(req, 1 * LINK); At such a high volatility for the token, why on earth would any developer use this? It currently costs 0.1 LINK which is standard across all nodes. If the price of LINK goes to $10 --> it comes to $1 per request.. probably around 10000x more expensive than traditional data providers.
These are subsidized by other sponsors. Re: feeds.chain.link. That's also why answer #1. Chainlink also subsidizes some of this by paying node operators. Read the white paper buddy.
Is this guy like an XRP holder trying to fud? Frankly, you're not sending your best. Absolutely shameful display of pilpul.
>This is simply untrue. Anyone can run a node. Anyone can fill jobs. It's up to a node operator to network and actually get jobs. The network is 100% decentralized in the way that competitive business is decentralized. You just have to offer incentive for people to use your node, be it cheaper prices, premium data, a higher staked collateral, etc.
It's highly cherry picked. For example lets say I want to run a node on the price of Bitcoin/USD price. They wouldn't allow my node to influence their official price feed.
>This is of course adjustable and just a completely unimportant number used currently. Anyone can charge any amount they want, and it will likely be in USD value, not LINK value, in the future. The network is not in its final form right now.
I agree this is adjustable, but where does the token value come from? It is an ERC20 token, and all of its value is TIED to ethereum. They claim it's token agnostic, but ALL of the token holders are actually holding erc20 tokens. If they wanted to operate on another blockchain, they would have to replicate the tokens on that other chain --> and if this happened, what would happen to all the token holders?
It's an ERC-667 token.
Some people just need spoon-fed because usually when you fall in this range of IQ 70-115 you think you are too smart too read the white paper and are inherently lazy. They what other people to answer their pathetic questions. In other words NGMI
You misunderstand the chainlink network and the chainlink price feeds. Read
This isn't even spoon-feeding, he's just flailing his arms around screeching "NOOOO BABY DONT WANT BABA"
You're being oblivious to economies of scale. Quit thinking like a small business owner.
>It's highly cherry picked. For example lets say I want to run a node on the price of Bitcoin/USD price. They wouldn't allow my node to influence their official price feed.
This is the free market user. Anyone can spin up a BTC/USD node. Of course any serious smart contract is going to choose LinkPool or Fiews as a data provider over yours. If you developed a robust infrastructure, garnered a social media presence, and provided evidence of your reliability, you would likely get jobs.
Alternatively, don't provide data for BTC/USD like anyone else can do. The cool thing about a free market is that those who can't compete with the best on popular things just fill particular niches.
Maybe provide data for weather in your city, maybe provide data for OSRS GP:USD conversion rate. I don't know. But don't pick something as uncreative as BTC/USD. Again, it's the free market.
>I agree this is adjustable, but where does the token value come from? It is an ERC20 token, and all of its value is TIED to ethereum. They claim it's token agnostic, but ALL of the token holders are actually holding erc20 tokens. If they wanted to operate on another blockchain, they would have to replicate the tokens on that other chain --> and if this happened, what would happen to all the token holders?
Where does the token value come from?
It comes from the fact that LINK tokens will be staked as collateral in nodes for financial incentive to never provide false data. That is the true functional value of the chainlink token.
Nodes put $XXXXXXXXXX at risk in their node, and say if they provide false data they will pay a penalty on that collateral. That is LINKs value. And the fact that anyone wanting to query nodes for data must also purchase LINK to do so.
Chainlink has out of the box oracles that they subsidize for builders that are going to help jumpstart the network. Ie Aave, Synthetix, bZx, MCDEX etc.
Anyone could create an oracle and recruit nodes to feed data to such oracle using the chainlink network and try to market it to dapp builders to use at a cheaper price but the highest of quality nodes that are already operating will say no b/c they are making more on the Chainlink price oracle
This is exactly how sergey speaks. I'm calling it right now this guy is sergey.
Wait for an authority figure to tell you to buy it when it's at $200. This is the Reddit approach to crypto and life in general.
>They claim it's token agnostic, but ALL of the token holders are actually holding erc20 tokens. If they wanted to operate on another blockchain, they would have to replicate the tokens on that other chain --> and if this happened, what would happen to all the token holders?
This isn't a fault of chainlink, but a fault of other blockchains not being far enough along to warrant such a thing. Harmony ONE actually just released early code for LINK tokens on ONE blockchain.
The general idea is that the tokens are locked into a smart contract on ETH, and then unlocked from a smart contract on ONE. Where each contract is 100% accurate relative to the other one. Through open source, verifiable code.
>The cool thing about a free market is that those who can't compete with the best on popular things just fill particular niches.
Maybe provide data for weather in your city, maybe provide data for OSRS GP:USD conversion rate. I don't know. But don't pick something as uncreative as BTC/USD. Again, it's the free market.
Yes user, 100%. This is actually really good advice and comment. Fill a niche.
>Anyone can run a node/set up an oracle of nodes. Smart devs just choose the node Chainlink picks
So this basically contradicts "decentralization" -- if "smart" people which I assume are most devs.. are essentially only utilizing the nodes chainlink has cherry picked. Chainlink is now acting as the "Trusted Source"
>Because it's worth it. Chainlink has developed the most robust, tamper-proof oracle design to date. Out of any solution in history.
>If you implement a mock-oracle with a single API, you are expecting that API to have complete accuracy and never act maliciously.
>If you use multiple APIs, congrats you've basically recreated chainlink but a much shittier version that doesn't scale to infinity because of the decentralized network aspect.
An aggregation layer of APIs.. acting as a source of truth is an attactive concept... but t given the amount of hype chainlink has created it is still underwhelming. Aggregating data from multiple API sources --> making a decision is not a difficult feat of computer science. It's essentially just acting as a price feed aggregator right now that writes to the blockchain... and it's worth 3B market cap.