https://ethcc.io/archive/The-Role-of-Oracles-in-the-Tokenized-Asset-Wave
>this is our work with SWIFT, this is sort of relevant to you folks, but, um....Is the highlight of the talk. Basically “SWIFT has only tangential relevance to you guys but you’ve been a bunch of corrupt assholes for years so I just wanted to dunk on you”
>same slides, same speech, same priceOOOOOO LINKIES
>>58727420I will consume the sirgay slop and be excited for the next sirgay slop
>>58727438>>58727447>>58727448like shooting fish in a barrel kek
>"the other way to think about this is 'what's gonna happen next?' which is gonna be trillions upon trillions from traditional markets"14m52sHope you boys have your bags packed and your loose ends taken care of. We're leaving the station in the coming months.
>ETHCCPAH THETIC!
Eth CuckCon?
>>58727420Yea I am erect. He basically just said adopt or be poor, your choice. Hopefully the people listening choose wisely.
>>58727469Not so fast
>>58727420how does this relate to "the great taking?"
>I can assure you that these folks (blackrock) are in the process of integrating with blockchains. >the whole Blackrock BUIDL thing is just the very very early stages of the early beginningwhat did Serger mean by this?
>>58727733
kek ethcc? literal bottom of the barrell roll trash. can't chainlink get an invite to a real conference?
>>58727605kek this guy is so utterly ill informed and quite franky thick as two short shitty planks. It's VERY clear that he and others like him only make any money because they managed to slime their way into a position of notoriety and so by their very say so number go up. They have the insight of gnats and if they were to start from nothing again in this market they would flounder like the braindead gobshites they truly are. When Link is at four digits precisely as a result of what he's just dismissed in that tweet this cancerous polyp will say 'nobody could have seen it coming' even though the information has been readily available for YEARS.
>>58727605>That's great and all Sergey, but let's check in to see what twatter midwit #83438 has to say about itcheckmate linkies
4:47Sergey is so fed up talking about the same BS for 7 years because people still dont get it, that he actually says god bless you to someone sneezing in the audience mid speech.
>>58727790'Cobie' whoever he is has done such little research he isn't even aware that Chainlink services need to be paid for in Link. It's such a simple fact, yet these morons show themselves up again and again by displaying this proud ignorance of it. You can see them beginning to read up on Chainlink ages ago and then thinking "ah, this is too complicated, it'll never catch on" and dismissing it. And yes, he 100% will say "no one could have seen it coming"
>>58728507I'm pretty sure the tweet was written with full knowledge of this fact. The point is, even if services are paid for in LINK doesn't mean that the backbone will be LINK. There has already been substantial tokenization without the use of LINK.https://app.rwa.xyz/treasuries
>>58727420good presentation
>>58728611Seethe
>>58727790to be fair he is right about every other thing out there except eth and linkall the garbage that markets itself as the bank/institution coini am not even gonna list the most known ones but you know them, all of them big fat zeros
>>58727605>digital assets will boom>but it will be impossible to profit from it because jews play 10D chesslol fucking doomer retard
>>58728814>>58728857give me ONE mechanical reason why LINK will perform well due to RWAs
>>58728975RWAs need to "carry" information as they move from blockchain to blockchain. Information like their reserve status, their ownership status, their KYCAML requirements etc etc.Chainlink is the technology that allows these assets to stay updated with all of the information that a mature digital asset will need, as it passes between the eventually thousands or tens of thousands of chains that will constitute both the permission and permissionless spaces.Listen to Nigel Dobson talk about "value + messaging". It's Chainlink's killer feature and it's bigger than anything else, and you need CCIP for it to work.
>>58728981ok fine I believe you
>>58728975And, in case you've been living in a cupboard; you have to pay to use CCIP, and guess which token drives it? Clue: It's not QNT
Buump
>>58728535Just wait until it has to be moved.
>>58729294>Just wait until it has to be movedkek exactly. what's the point in tokenising it if you can't do anything with the tokenised version? you might as well not have bothered.Now, pay up.
>>58729506Ah yes another $8 CCIP fee. So much moving, so much fees.
>>58729588>what happens when you multiply that fee by millions, then billions, then trillions?>muh it hasn't happened so it can't ever happenokay boss thanks
>>58729506>>58729741Genuinely curious: what would necessitate tokenized assets to transfer trillions of times between chains? If there is so little interchain transfer of existing shitcoins, why would tokenized RWAs need to move interchain so much?Most people will just have a private key where they hold their stuff on a single chain. Most people don't buy assets and constantly move them around (especially with such high transfer fees and taxation events).Like I get it, it sounds good...but if this infrastructure is built out, there isn't going to be constant interchain settlement. Settlement will happen on one chain in the cheapest way possible and people will have private keys on that chain where they hold assets...
>>58727447kek
>$13Who cares
>>587292942 more weeks
>>58729771Banks build their own private chains that will need to interact
>>58729741Definitely not millions. There has only been 23k CCIP txs ever. Idk how much that is per month, maybe 6k a month, which would be 72k a year. Good luck even getting 100k txs with Tradfi. Oh and that would only equate to 800k a year. Also to add CCIP is a crypto native product so accessibility is easy, I wager tradfi would only be a fraction of the txs generated.
>>58729771>Settlement will happen on one chainhaha no>>58729842>tradfi generates only a fraction of the txs of cryptoThere's no way you aren't getting paid to say shit this dumb.
>>58727420>>58727469>>58727492>>58727733>>58727790>>58727796>>58727807>>58728611You will never be under 30 again
>>58729853The only stupid one is you thinking everything will be done crosschain. Enough with the pipedreams and don't reply to me again Michael.
>>58729861>anon discovers agingYeah, so?
>all this over a fucking json parseruve got to be kidding me
>>58729833>>58729853I haven't seen any evidence of banks building out a network of blockchain networks to do settlement behind closed doors. Can you show me some info related to this (ideally not put out by Chainlink)?
I see this: https://blockworks.co/news/citigroup-tokenized-services-permissioned-blockchain-clientsSeems like it is always what they're "going to do" though. We'll see, hopefully we'll all be rich...just another BTC halving or two or by 2030...maybe 2045.
>>58729842I'm going to stop replying to you people. You know what you're saying is patently absurd. You just make shit up and lie. It's incredibly dishonest. I have my stack, if you want to lie to others to stop them from getting theirs then that's on you. I no longer see the point in debating with people who have no qualms at all with saying shit like>I wager tradfi would only be a fraction of the txs generated.without even a shred of shame. Letting brown people on the internet was a massive, massive tragedy.
>>58729891look at the fucking data you nerd. its right in your face onchain.
>>58729864>you thinking everything will be done crosschainIt's either all crosschain, or institutions will suddenly all move to a single chain. The former is a million times more likely.
>>58729891Just respond with chainlink memes. They get all upset and ignore you.
>>58729882Your timeframe is too early. 2060 is more likely
>>58729891If I'm so wrong then why don't you convince me how instead of having a hissy fit and running away. You sound really pathetic desu.The CCIP txs maxed out. Your basic premise is that LINK will me routing all financial data which is a poor assumption. I'm not trying to stop anyone from buying, people need to see both sides of the argument and I'm providing that.
>>58729938>CCIP txs maxed outYou're spewing the most random shit imaginable lmao
>>58729938You're a fucking simpleton if you believe what you wrote earnestly, and I don't have to elaborate further because you wouldn't understand it anyway. Only someone with no eyes to see and no ears to hear could think that it's sensible to suggest that cross chain defi tx will be more numerous than tradfi, nevertheless that tradfi will be a 'fraction' of those transactions! If you believe this it's because you're a fucking moron. I can't state that strongly enough. As I have said already, I see no point in discussing anything with a person of your pitiable IQ and I will not be replying again, no matter how much you claim victory and cope and seethe in whatever way you choose. My time is more valuable than to be frittered away on a man whose intelligence is matched by a down-syndrome child and who would lose in a battle of wits to a Ugandan snow-plough salesman.Have a blessed day.
>>58729294https://www.ledgerinsights.com/gdf-fix-partner-for-tokenization-interoperability/you do know there are alternative methods being tested to move 'that which has been tokenized' across chains? Swift is pushing for it's connector (the chainlink method) but Swift isn't the only horse in the race. I've got my stack and i'm not selling, just to be clear.Would wager that swift wins out because of its EBL (bill of lading) proposals which actually save money in the here and now and have already been through 2 poc's and much of various industries have already committed to using it (for instance much of the shipping industry has said they'll use it for half their cargo within 5 years and 100% of their cargo within 10 years) . In this swift (and chainlink, presumably) is offering a genuinely unique proposal and it has been taken up. With this being taken up and proving successful then so will the other chainlink services. Need to be realistic and recognise that with dlt / cross chain, there isn't even industry wide agreement on the need for 'reconciling digital islands' yet , and if you don't believe me then read about what the BIS is proposing or about hyperledger or whatever. Will be interesting to see how prominent a role chainlink play at this years swift conference.
>>58730052>Will be interesting to see how prominent a role chainlink play at this years swift conference.nice read Sergey was like the VIP during the Sibos last year and I can imagine his treatment will be only better this october
>>58730052>>58730128The end of October is going to be pretty interesting. Sibos is in Beijing 21st-24th, and Smartcon is in Hong Kong 30-31st. I have no idea what will happen but it feels like the stars really are aligning on this. I can't wait to see the speakers and agenda on both of these events.
>>58730170oh great, we have the new cope events that we can all fantasize about and then cope about when they become nothing burgers as always.
>>58729979>le secret>>58730052>>58730052>>58730128>>58730170blah blah blah, the chart >>58730178/thread
>>58730052>guys it's not CERTAIN :oNothing is certain, even shit that is actively happening isn't certain to continue to happen.What a completely braindead doomer take.
>>58730275>it's certain>'doomer'go back to your ephrase book and try harder
>>58730286I see friendly fire is enabled on this server.
>>58730302sorry i misread your post :(
>>58728981>RWAs need to "carry" information as they move from blockchain to blockchain. Information like their reserve status, their ownership status, their KYCAML requirements etc etc.To put more aptly, the Chainlink network is required for RWAs to have a heartbeat, breathe, and to function. Outside of the Chainlink network, RWAs will be like NFTs we saw in the 2020 craze, PNGs with no function.
>>58729771>Genuinely curious: what would necessitate tokenized assets to transfer trillions of times between chains? If there is so little interchain transfer of existing shitcoins, why would tokenized RWAs need to move interchain so much?You gotta backtrack a bit. The first question is "Why should I use 'X'" chain? Banks asked that question of why bother use Ethereum/X/Y/Z/ chain. They independently decided that they won't use them and instead make their own EVM chain. But mind you, each of the banks did this and there are numerous banks. The SWIFT network has 11K banks. Even if it's a 10th who adopt blockchain, that's over 1K chains. So now each of those banks are busy printing NFTs of their assets on their chains but hol up, if they want to buy and sell their RWAs with other banks, they have to figure out how to deal with the fact that their NFTs on their chain while their partner bank's NFTs are on the partner banks' chain. Hence the interoperability problem.
>>58730525You’re too intelligent for this years /biz/. stop helping newfags.
>>58730525yes, interoperability is an issue. It's been highlighted as such in pretty much every industry report on dlt and web 3.0 since forever, hence the ccip hype since forever. notwithstanding that, ccip isn't the only interoperability solution being used nor is it the only one being proposed.
>>58730507Never forgetti based 42 retired off those NFTs you claim have no function and no purpose.I wager NFTs were really just a way for ultra high IQ gigachads like 42 to retire early so he can focus on freemasonic interpretive dance
>>58730922>ccip isn't the only interoperability solution being used nor is it the only one being proposedentertain us. name and tell us about any contenders. I'm sitting down and promise i'll try not to laugh. ok, i'm ready lol (woops)
