Can we have an honest discussion about this shit? No baseless fud.My question is - with them announcing new CCIP users on a near daily basis why the fuck doesn't the activity increase? Is it just a bunch of useless shit dapps and L1s with no users? And if so, why does Chainlink even bother to onboard them? Isn't CCIP onboarding still gated so they have to use resources for it?Despite adding multiple new CCIP users September is trailing to be about on par with August which was the worst month for usage since January.
>>58981738The main users this was built for have their platforms in testing still. It functions for general purpose defi right now but that honestly doesn't matter.
>>58981738You answered your own question. Though, something tells me if someone were to say that to you outright, you'd call it "baseless FUD".
You won't get an honest discussion here. Linkies are out of the loop for alternatives to CCIP. There are literal who bridges that transfer more value and make more revenue. But to answer your question, there are a lack of tokens on the system. USDC is the only legit token and can be transferred using the same backed via LayerZero or Wormhole at a cheaper cost.The lock and mint function isn't enabled yet, so older tokens can't be transferred using the system. This function has to become available, or the tokens need to upgrade their systems, which they won't. Then people have to provide liquidity to CCIP, that to which there is no incentive to do so.So all that said CCIP is actually cooked in its current state imo, we will not see an increase in revenue.Linkies will scream and shrill at my post but I have told you the exact truth of the matter and now it's up to you to confirm what I have said if you also want the truth.
kek baggie$300 daily revenueyet another chainshit flop
>>58982189>There are literal who bridges that transfer more value and make more revenue.source?
>>58982189kek remember when stinkers hyped up CCIP as the second coming of christ for a solid year and claimed that CCIP going live was gonna be the moment when the switched was flippedkekkekekekeke baggies, chainshit is dead
>>58982194https://defillama.com/bridgesCheck the 24hr volume. CCIP doesn't even make the top 20 in some cases. Also I'm not going to get into how 80% of CCIP revenue is actually MEV tier mechanics for transferring USDC. CCIP practically forces you to pay $8 to send a message to CCTP (Circle) when other services do it for free. So they are ripping you $8 every time you use CCIP to send USDC.
>>58982197I unironically believed the hype, now I'm sitting on the other side of the fence calling out all the bullshit that transpired. I was a true believer in the Chainlink the world theory. Let this be a lesson to never listen to all the retards on here, dyor and always be skeptical of everything. The worst thing you can do is letting retard anons do the thinking for you.The XRP threads are still getting 250 replies with vehement defense, that should tell you everything you need to know about this place.
>>58981738chainlink is basically hoping that they will get insitutional/bank adoption which will make them the standard and everyone will use ccip whether they like it or notit's a big bet but then all of this stuff in this scam market isgiven the the swift signals you'd be dumb not to have a bag in case they pull it off though>>58982189more narrowly, this is a good postccip can't be easily integrated for already deployed tokens to the extent that link on arbitrum can't be bridgedthere's also a lot of bridges with very suspect security but which have vc backing and ease of integration which they have to face
>>58981738they post like 5 new users/integrations/partnerships per day or so yet the CCIP revenue and token price remain one big joke, someone explain this scam to me like I'm 5
>>58982232forgot the actual pic
>>58982213baggies got real quiet since this post dropped>>58982219good on you for seeing through the bullshit, never too late to leave the cultYou're lucky that you woke up so you won't miss the bullrun holding chainshit.The crying and gnashing of teeth after yet another missed bullrun by the cultists will be a sight to behold
>>58982232because most projects are scams with very few users and fewer than need to bridgethe fees on ccip are also very low. they were initially high but they then reduced them to near nothing. why? as they think they will get more adoption. it also helps that chainlink doesn't need to make money from ccip - they have 400m LINK left to dump and off-chain deals (when you see a chain integration remember that they've been paid millions for this, etherscan likewise gets paid millions for an integration)then as mentioned, ccip can't integrate already deployed tokens. so all the integrations are from new projects. that is a good sign but 99% of projects will failyou can see it with stuff like AAVE and GHOaave can't integrate their own token but did GHO from day 1
yeh it's crazy i bet the pool must be emptying out really quickl..-oh wait, it's still closed. how weird.
>>589824052020BTC $11,000ETH $300BNB $20SOL $3Link $202024BTC $57,000ETH $2,400BNB $540SOL $130Link $10
>>58982405I understand that you find the pool special mainly because of its unique, limited size. However, apart from that, there's nothing particularly noteworthy about it.
>>58982405I already BTFO an linktard in another thread but claiming 'Pool is closed' is just misleading. Stakers unstake all the time, every few hours, this happens almost everyday.
>>58981738pic related is my response to your pathetic post, stinkie
>>58982880this. im monitoring it. stinkies are waking up and escaping every day
>>58982405I remember screenshotting months ago seeing people exiting the pool, many og's as well by looking at the wallet creation date. It stays full mainly because of LinkPool, but there are still a fair share of suckers willing to commit. I will have to take a thorough look to see what kind of people are staking or withdrawing to assess current sentiment. All that said, being in the pool is a double edge sword, 5% apy is good for long term holders, but if LINK pumps substantially within a short timeframe then poolers will get rekt due to the 30 day withdrawal time.
>>58983007>if>pumps>substantiallyyou call yourself a fudder?
The chartIt brokeded
>>58983081I'm not participating in the fuddie vs avocado exchanges, it's practically the worst part of this board and is not helpful in constructive analysis. I've noticed it's only a few individuals who aren't capable of engaging with the criticism spoken of above, that should tell you enough about the type of holders they are. That is to say that they aren't cut from the same cloth of old.The advocates are paid. If someone's income is based on supporting X thing, no amount of argumentation will convince them otherwise. They are disingenuous, the summit being CLG and fishy. You have to remember this board found LINK early, most of the smart people have gone and the culture now is TikTok tier cooked. The board generally can be capable of great things and that includes making anons a lot of money, we haven't had a dark horse like LINK in a while (maybe APU). I'm hoping we can revert back to that original state and move on from the bickering because as LINK stands, I have come to understand the project isn't what I thought it was and there needs to be a serious intervention for the project to even break ATH ever again.
>>58983210>t. retard who actually believes the fud
>>58983223He comes across way more genuine than people like you, who just insult and do one liners, culty.Every time i see genuine criticism and discussion, well thought out posts which invite conversation and remind me exactly of the older days(2018), its a “fuddie” now and it only every gets insults, various types of ad homs etcThere is simply nothing positive left with chainlink to discuss if you have been here since day one. If you have been here that long and aren’t paid, but are a rational person you simply wont be positive due to all the evidence and track record Sergey has given for 7 years.Only people who have purchased in the lat year or so can possibly not be this way, or if they are paid. Or simply a cult retard.Even the only potential positive thing to speculate with(swift) is STILL A FUCKING POC and the same shit we were speculating with in 2017. Its not necessary a major positive anymore unless you are a fucking newfag. It is a 7 year old poc which has done fuck all, and OGs see DTCC as more of the same rightfully so.Notice how CLL pay crypto influencers to shill lately? Because the grift is up witu SWIFT POCS. Oldfags dont give a fuck anymore as i explained, but some newfags will just see muh swift and buy thinking soon it will be significant. There is clearly not even enough newfags buyer to balance the oldfags getting out he the perms dumpingn price, but it probably stems the bleeding enough for Sergey to cash out. However its not going well for him this year. Every one of his Quarterly dumps has been lower and lower prices. Even the odd newfag isn’t interested anymore hence the increasing desperation of paying influencers to shill when they never used to
>>58983223honestly i can't tell anymore if its retards who have fallen for the fud or just more 4d chess how many layers of irony am i on shitpostingits just boring, baggies calling baggies baggies. everyone on this board holds 10k+ link and there's a large amount of them paralyzed with fear that if it ever gets hyped again, they'll have another august 2020. that's the reality. so they sit here and pick it apart with a fine toothed comb while the rest of the scams in the market get a free pass.
>>58983274you're so fucking stupid if you actually believe chainlink bothers to pay shills to barrage 4chan, eth is far bigger and even they don't have a coordinated heavy shilling done here, there's only two types of paid shilling here, the extremely low effort bot posts for garbage like supra, and the astroturfed coins who copy paste old link memes to pretend they're a "4chan coin", basically coordinated discord/telegram raids.
>>58983281Where did i say they pay shills to target 4chan. You project your mindset too much mate. I said crypto influencers. Its so true. They have bene shilling Chainlink suddenly lately on twitter and youtube and are obviously paid.Eth doesn’t need any paid shillers you dip shit. Its actually a standard, actually decentralised and is actually coordinated by a charity which is careful with funds these days.>>58983275More projection here.Most of the baggies/culties are the ones who are scared of selling for fear it suddenly all turns around. So many pathetic morons of the OG variety cling to that gay ETH 4chan post.Its very clear to me fudders dont give w fuck anymore and have sold or will sell the rest of their stacks on any significant pump to $20 or anything. Personally i finally got 100% out form Jan-feb and thank fuck as its done nothing but dump all year since.I remain and post here every week or so because i was invested for 7 fucking years, lied to and mislead by the fat fuck CEO and i have very strong opinions on it due to that
>>58983288nice reddit spacingeverything i don't like is projectionyeah ok, meanwhile you just confirmed you yourself are a baggie.its just baggies calling baggies baggies. nobody believes you sold shit, if anyone actually had the balls to do it they'd post proof the second it happened (and then it would get recycled by the same baggies who fud here 24/7 pretending it was their sells).
>>58983291Im phone posting, actually, and i couldn’t give a toss about your lame attempts to discredit any criticism of chainlink by constantly ad-hom replying.I was a baggie. I am 100% out since Jan/feb.I bought in at around $0.80, my average probably $1.2. I sold at $37 for the first time, but sadly that was on the way DOWN, then i took more profits at $22-24.I then sold nothing until Jan/feb thus year when i got out entirely. No shit i have strong opinions you dirty cultists, i was heavily invested and following it for 7 fucking years. At least i profited even if it was a farcry from expectations
>>58983274It's crystal clear, and I’m practically certain that they’re getting paid by CL. I even saw a screenshot of an invoice for shilling Polkadot and other projects. Just take a look at some of the paid shillers on X: Quinten, 048.eth, Kyle Chasse, and Michael Van de Poppe. They make the mistake of posting LINK shill posts at the same time. As for the so-called “paid fudders”? That’s all just nonsense. Almost all fudders are just dealing with heavy losses or frustrated bagholders and are using FUD as their coping mechanism, while the remaining 1% are simply clueless newfags.
>>58983296>it was real in my mindlmao. the only people who still bring up link on /biz/ are assblasted fudders
>>58983300>more empty and meaningless one linersok avocado
>>58983294phone posting and reddit posting great comboyou weren't a baggie, you are a baggie. you're guilty of the same projection you accuse others of. as are most here. its just a boring echo chamber of frustrated baggies. people who move on from an investment do not sit and post about it for weeks/months/years on end.
>>58983304>you're projecting>keeps projecting >n-no you're the one who's projecting!!!the cognitive dissonance of the link shiller is hilarious
>>58983304What is you're purpose at this point? You have made multiple replies and literally said nothing of substance. You just keep carrying on like a retard, if you have the balls address the criticism or stfu already.
>>58983304>no. Its impossible for someone to sell chainlink. They hold chainlink. False prophet!Listen to you. This is exactly why people see you a a cult you disgusting faggot.You are completely mentally broken, you cant even conceptualise someone having sold chainlink.
>>58983314>>58983313nothing in this thread is of substance. the irony is you enter this thread not to talk about ccip, but to bitch about paranoia over paid advocates and shill fucking apu of all garbage.
>>58983317i didn't say that, i said if you sold you'd post proof instead of continuing to bitch and moan about it. someone would have. nobody ever does. i held kleros 4 years ago for a bit (yeah anyone remember that one?). i sold that shit and didn't think twice about it. i didn't spend the next 4 years fud posting about why pnk was a terrible idea or a scam.
>>58981738Didn't read, NEVER buying your 2021 shitcoin bags.
>>58983320Not even going to bother addressing your points. Everyone can see clearly how absolutely deranged you are and I wouldn't be surprised if you were that fishy guy.
>>58983300>it was real in my mindDo you even browse X? Anyone with any semblance of pattern recognition or the ability to see through the facade can clearly see that these guys are being paid to shill Chainlink. The signs are all there if you actually pay attention. It's not a good look. Picrel is just one recent example.
>>58983336twitter is not /biz/, numbnuts
>>58982880>>58982922>why yes we monitor the pool HOURLY>no we aren't seething Kek fuddies
>shit out a 1 pbtid "genuine concern" thread>frantically fill the thread with samefagging fud spamGet a hobby, a job, or a girlfriend you absolute freak. You're wasting your life on here.Better yet, apply for a position at Chainlink if you're so desperate to influence their activities. You'll have a bajillion times more actual impact than by spamming and seething on this board 24/7.
Also, nobody cares about the crypto adoption of CCIP.Chainlink has already had mass crypto adoption for years, and yet the market still ranks it below a dozen useless coins.
>>58983369>>58983375>nooooo multiple people cannot have a negative sentiment about my bags it's a conspiracy you're all samefagging reeeee
>>58983344>attempting to validate the statement "pool is closed">y-y-you're seething reeeeeekek this is hilarious
>>58981738>guys let’s have an honest discussion>1 pbtid
>>58983416How many times you've ground your teeth whilst looking at the (full) staking pool dashboard?Confess, you've attempted to snag one spot, havent you?>oh there's like 2k open space, ill open meta mask and–>ohhhh you almost got itLmaooo
>>58983411hi opYou'd have more impact on CLL's doings working as their cafeteria lady for one single day than spamming on here for 20 more years.
>>58983440>seething blogpost>n-no you're seething reeeeeKEK this is comedy gold>>58983443>s-s-samefag reeeeeeeeeeeeeeesure buddy whatever helps you slowly at night
>>58983294clap clap you took profit like everyone else, well donebut why would anyone sell all their link given swift, dtcc tiesit was only june 2023 that we got any real confirmation with swiftinstead you get emotional and sell everythingsad
>>58983472>you get emotional and sell everythingwhy you playing along with his 'i sold' larp? he never sold a damn thing and we all know it
>>58983369you really think someone like that has what it takes to get a job at Chainlink? i suppose they might need someone to mop the toilets. otherwise, come on.
>>58983475true also unlikely someone who sold nearly a year ago would still be hanging around chainlink threads
I bought in 2019 at an average price of $2.50. Is there any hope at this point of going back to $50 even if this is 3-5 years down? I stupidly quit my comfy wagie job in February thinking this was it.
>>58983542You will never see $50 ever again.NEVER hold a shitcoin past its expiry date.
>>58983542Why don't the bull posters address him? Cmon guys, don't leave him hanging. Give him a price target.
>literally begging for engagementlmao
>>58983291correct.
>>58983477requirements to work at chainlink if white male:-5.5 gpa at Ivy league school-advanced degree, doctorate preferred-25 years banking experience-must pass several rounds of interviews and score 70% or higher on competency examif non-white male and/or gay/trans white male:-pulse-access to internet connection / X account -headphones-willingness to travel to company sleepovers once a quarter
>>58984148can you point to any employees there who fit into this second category? from there we can look at their resumes and decide if your theory is correct
>>58984199gotchu bro, here's two of them
>>58984199shall we start with Benedict Chan? He's non-white and is the Vice President of Engineering there. Surely he's way too overqualified for a job at Chainlink, in your opinion?
>>58984220here's another one for you, happy resume digging!
>>58984213These are unpaid Chainlink Advocates and not employees. Wow, what a weak effort.
>>58984148we already saw the chainlink team pic and there was only like 2-3 niggers, which for a team of 500+ is very impressive
>>58984228>noooo those don't count, I swear they aren't being compensated in any way or form for their advocating how about you dig deeper?
>>58984228how about her, bro? is she unpaid as well? and how would you know if someone's unpaid or not? are you an insider perhaps?
>>58984226Her resume is impressive and goes back a way, including working 7 years at Electronic Arts.I know since she has green hair you wish to believe she is unqualified, but you'd be wrong.https://www.linkedin.com/in/beegirl/details/experience/rather more than a pulse and an internet connection (which it sounds like all you have)
>>58984243what's the problem, incel? sight of a normal white woman make you angry?
>>58984252>7 years at the clusterfuck of EAdoing what? destroying the company from the inside out? KEK>inb4 HR>>58984253not even close, simp, the hypothesis excluded>non-white malewhich by definition includes women of all colours ;)
>>58984234how about you show me what you found, then? these are low level intern types who wish to get a foot in the door and are likely studying outside of their advocacy capacity. more power to them , but it has been stated they're unpaid. they likely get expenses and a few perks, but come on, is this the best you can do? hey, how about you show us the janitor and the cleaning lady? that'll convince us all
>>58984264>they likely get expenses and a few perks...in the form of LINK tokens I presume?HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAok, how about this guy? what about his Linkedin?KEK
>>58984256>7 years at the clusterfuck of EAyou mean the same clusterfuck that generated $7.56B last year? yeh, that's where she worked for 7 years>non-white malei asked about Benedict Chan, can you tell me your criticisms of him?
poor gay fuddies
>>58984279He's a white male. what's your point?this convo is about the 2nd category
>>58984285yes, the same clusterfuck that produces shitty after shitty productwhat was her role again, bro?>Benedict Chanoh you mean the guy who is listed as a VP of engineering yet he's been MIA for years?when was the last time you heard about him doing anything?>>58984293he's jewish, newfriend
>>58984299>what was her role again, bro?look at it yourself on the link i posted, bro>when was the last time you heard about him doing anything?Chainlink don't report to me what Ben is doing on a weekly basis. You think they should be?>he's jewish, newfriendkek is he fuck. huxtable is an old anglo-saxon name and he looks about as jewish as my spotty white backsidefuddies in disarray here. gorra luv it
>>58984336she was a community project manager in every company she's been in and she did some audio engineering for EAwowamazing bro>Chainlink don't report to mesweaty, you know exactly what I meant, don't play dumb now with such cop out responses >huxtable is an old anglo-saxon namekek you fucking retard, keep avoiding his resume like a good goy shilllonkie shills on suicide watch
>>58984363those answers were utter bs. dismissed, engagement fuddie. bye bye!
>>58984388>y-y-you're bs>t.better luck next time, shill!
>>58984398>heh heh, another internet argument won>surely this made by bags pump, lemme check real qui...
>>58982213>>58982189You're missing the point here with comparing Chainlink to the other bridges. CCIP is built around security being prioritized far beyond everything else. The other bridges are not. While most of the DeFi users right now don't give a shit, the bridge hacks did a number on the industry's reputation. And more importantly, the users with value >>58981747 is talking about have their own CCIP network designed for them and they're not ready to bridge to the permissionless version everyone tracking now.
>>58982213It doesn't appear at all there. Are you sure it's being included?
>>58984493yup, the target customer of CCIP isn't shitcoin traders. for them, buggy bridges work just fine.
>>58984228hahahah so they don't even pay their employees??>>58984199>can you point to any employees there who fit into this second categorychris barrettzayi tiktok broadother broad who modeling tshirts i can look up others later if you go here https://chain.link/team and scroll down it has pics but not all the names, but using normal observation and physiognomy you can figure most of it
>>58981747it's going to be 20 years until the price of the token is affected, isn't it
>>58984493The security angle is bullshit.No amount of audits means anything in terms of security. What is the actual test is having a high TVL and not being hacked over a certain amount of time.CCIP has no TVL so no one even targets them for a hack. LayerZero and Wormhole haven't been hacked in years, so saying they don't prioritize security isn't true, also they took on all the risk while being the largest two, it's just what was going to happen. When hacks happen, the system becomes more robust.When CLL allows for lock and mint we will see the true test, that's even if anyone bothers to use the system.>>58984516It's not there but you can see where it would rank if you look at daily CCIP metrics on X.
>>58986069>The security angle is bullshit.you just destroyed your credibility
>>58986069>CCIP has no TVL so no one even targets them for a hack. LayerZero and Wormhole haven't been hacked in years, so saying they don't prioritize security isn't true, also they took on all the risk while being the largest two, it's just what was going to happen. When hacks happen, the system becomes more robust.Anon, there are hundreds of blockchains out there that want to connect to each other. There are hundreds of blockchains that have real value being represented on their chains. They're not fucking taking chances with developers who had a sloppy past.
>>58985213https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aelpqWEBHR4
>>58984243sad story this one. she was caught by the german police posting nazi chainlink memes. 25 to life :(
>>58985239The year is 2050…Sp500 is 50,000Btc is $575,000Link is $10CCIP testing has finally concluded, and has moved into initial deployment for selected users Chainlink Labs’ second funding token, Link+, is almost fully distributed, leaving questions of how the company will afford a payroll of 10,000 remote workers going forward. Zach rynes, now at 750 pounds, lays in his hospital bed. He has an AI device hooked up his twitter so he doesnt have to move. His first post to start the day: >duuuuuuuuuuuuuuude if you want quick gains just go buy every other asset in existenceCatfishfishy immediately likes the post, then rushes over to change zachs bedpan. In an unexpected move, fishy chugs the contents of the pan, proving once and for all, he loves the taste of shit
>>58984493Also these "users with value" what are they exactly?Saying CCIP wasn't mainly intended for DeFi is a massive cop out. The amount of money moved through DeFi products is massive, and because CCIP was a slow mover with limited functionality, it basically is losing the race for bridge dominance which equates to lower token demand. Thinking some esoteric use case will pump LINK bags is actually stupid. We have hard data to work with and it demonstrates that token isn't much needed at all.>>58986110You have no idea what you're talking about. USDC is money, USDT is money. USDT has 3x the money of USDC, and CCIP isn't needed to Tx USDC, they have thier own system integrated with over 15 blockchains.ETH has the most actual money Onchain and are fully integrated with LZ and W. Even TRON arguably has a war chest of USDT. So where is this untapped value? All the biggest protocols are already tapped in.Go take a look at the bridge volume on defillama, it's 160m today.
>>58986139>>58986136OH NO!pools closed
>>58986136>Catfishfishy immediately likes the post, then rushes over to change zachs bedpan. In an unexpected move, fishy chugs the contents of the pan, proving once and for all, he loves the taste of shitthis is what i love about this community the care
>>58986169>the communitywhich you are not part of and never will be
>>58986169>the comMOONity
>>58986180>the CoMmuniStsget fuckedwe made ityou didn't
>>58986069>CCIP has no TVL so no one even targets them for a hack. LayerZero and Wormhole haven't been hacked in years, so saying they don't prioritize security isn't true, also they took on all the risk while being the largest two, it's just what was going to happen. When hacks happen, the system becomes more robust.Look at this scummy, curry-reeking shill lmao>here is my pick for bridges, shitcoin A along with shitbridge BKek get fucked nigger
>>58986136Hahaha
>>58986139>Saying CCIP wasn't mainly intended for DeFi is a massive cop out.You can call it a cop out but it's the truth. The main thing you've been focusing on is just users moving tokens from one shitcoin casino to another separate casino on a different chain. The real magic, that other bridges can't do, is send instructions with the token. Aka, you can program the token to do X Y and Z on Blockchain B from a starting point of Blockchain A. This takes time to build. And developers have yet to hit that novel protocol that incorporates this functionality that everyone wants to get a piece of.Also, I'm talking about RWAs, tokenized real world assets, the realized version of NFTs. It has already eclipsed the total DeFi market by being over 150% as of July I recall (according to Sergey). And the rest of the financial world is excited to push this to the next level by next year.
>>58986136kek basedfuck chainshit and faggot advocates
>>58986318prove him wrongyou literally can't baggienow shut your smelly arse you fucking stinker and fuck off from our board
>>58986139>The amount of money moved through DeFi products is massiveA lot of money is moved every day and a portion of that money movement occurs on DeFi infrastructure. What percentage of the daily total volume occurs on DeFi infrastructure?
>>58986359name one thing that including instructions for target chain(s) will revolutionize
>>58986579You should look at ISO20022 message types and what they do and think about cases where CCIP+DLT can improve things. Right now the obvious use cases involve performing the same actions TradFi institutions already perform, but with reduced risk, reduced cost, and increased speed. The ability to construct a multi-step operation and only execute it if every step succeeds is a very big deal. Chainlink is built primarily for SWIFT and their use cases. For example, I don't just want to send value. I want to send value and perform a series of collateral operations. Look at the types of operations SWIFT has message types for and think about where CCIP+DLT can improve things.
>>58984518Stop pretending link baggies were not hyping up CCIP for years as “link will get a transaction fee on all these shitcoin traders chasing the best yield on different chains”.You people are honestly something else. I have never seen a group so happy to chase a carrot on a stick, invent your own carrots on a stick, then completely pretend the prior ones were not a thing as you invent or find a new carrot
>Woahhhhhhhhhhh duuuuuuuuuuude my dogcoin from Sol chain just showed up in my ETH wallet with some instructionsUmm what?>duuuuuuuuuuude INSTRUCTIONS!!!!For what?>duuuuuuuuuuuuude BLOCKCHAIN…its the FUTUREwhat do the instructions say>whistles for dog>here here neiro>opens instructions file>blank notepad file w the word “nigger” THE FUTURE OF FINANCE
>>58986751you just never understood them dude. the carrots are just fine
>>58986359This is a load of nonsense. LINK is birthed out of the crypto space, if it can't capture the value from the space it emerged out of, how do you expect it to do so outside. The fact is that hundreds of millions are moved everyday in crypto, for what purpose is irrelevant, all that actually matters is that LINK should be paid to do it, but the reality is far from this.Also it's funny how you shit on the "shitcoin" casino and then suggest some DeFi money games are actually more substantive, it's the exact same thing with a different label, playing money games crosschain. Also there are no practical use cases for such things, maybe a crosschain Olympus fork at best. That said the finality time is a massive hindrance, I won't expect any form of product to utilise such mechanics, unless you can give me an example.Another thing about the RWA's is that LINK has no tangible hand in this. Show me how LINK is capitalising off this, they actually aren't, it's just a wild assumption that once the RWA's need to be moved, it will be CCIP to do it, which is baseless. All the TVL is in protocols that have no connection to CLL, just look at Ondo and Goldfinch, it's all done within their internal systems. You just assume LINK will have a hand in this when this isn't what's actually happening.
>>58987165>it can't capture the value from the space it emerged out ofNothing in crypto has ever made gains from "capturing value".>it's just a wild assumption that once the RWA's need to be moved, it will be CCIP to do itIt's not wild at all and hardly even an assumption when you have the likes of Swift and DTCC working on exactly that with CCIP lmao. You silly retard.
>>58987313>working onPoC's are not tangible products.
>>58987415They're literally "working on" it, like I said you esl monkey.Nobody is doing anything more than "working on" mass adoption of RWAs, and Chainlink is the absolute prime candidate for actually making this a reality.
>>58987433>DUUUUUUUUUUDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE WE FAILED TO MAKE ANY REVENUE FROM THE CRYPTO MARKET>UHHHHHHHH YEAH LOL WE'LL JUST GET REVENUE FROM BANKS BECAUSE LIKE, UHHHHHHH BANKS HAVE ALLLLLL THE MONEY!!!Lmao shut the fuck up you chainshit baggie
>>58987439look at this desperate fucker freakin cuz the pool's closed kekhard cheese, boyo. keep askin me to sell wontcha kekekekek
>>58987439>WE FAILED TO MAKE ANY REVENUE FROM THE CRYPTO MARKETNo they didn't, Chainlink generated 400 million USD worth of revenue in the past 3-4 years.And also revenue doesn't matter. No crypto has ever pumped from revenue.
>>58987415>just wait until it suddenly explodes and the price has shot to $200+ and then buy in, like any smart investorkek the state of this one
>>58987433Show me exactly what chainlink are "working on". The only thing I see is when Sergey says in interviews is "I hope they will use my system".They haven't done anything. Show me what they have done and compare it to the protocols I mentioned above, they actually have TVL of RWA's. There is zero substance to the Chainlink rhetoric surrounding RWA's its just a clever latch on like they did with AI.Chainlink has been "working with" swift for 7 years and somehow you think magically this year or next will be the one. Or maybe when ISO 20022 dropped, do you remember that one?
>>58987506>Show me exactly what chainlink are "working on"You fucking retard.https://www.swift.com/news-events/press-releases/swift-unlocks-potential-tokenisation-successful-blockchain-experimentshttps://www.dtcc.com/dtcc-connection/articles/2023/september/21/bringing-capital-markets-onchain-with-dtcc-and-chainlinkhttps://www.dtcc.com/dtcc-connection/articles/2024/may/16/smart-nav-pilot-report-bringing-trusted-data-to-the-blockchain-ecosystem
>>58987509You are not serious, this is your proof?You're a fucking retard and don't reply to me again you stupid cunt.
>>58987509NO NO NO THAT DOESN'T COUNT AND THE PRICE AND THERE'S A GIRL WITH GREEN HAIR AND THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE I MEAN TOO MANY PEOPLE AND MAINNET WILL NEVER HAPPEN NO NO I MEAN REAL MAINNET AND THE CHART AND YOU WILL MISS THE NEXT BULLRUUUUN AAAARGGGHHH
>>58987511What the fuck is even wrong with you lmao
>>58987506Hey, that's fair. In that case I think you should not invest in Chainlink and buy other protocols.
>>58987518his brain was too worn out with fudding all day and your links proved too much for him so he's jacked it in until tomorrow
>>58981738https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAYL5H46QnQ
>>58987526I think he just pilpulled himself into a stroke or something.
>>58987463No they didn't, and even if they did Sirgay isn't sharing it with the baggies kekekekekekekekeTOKEN>>58987456kek chart baggieNOTNEEDED
>>58987509>>58987514>>58987518>experiments>exploring>PoCs>we hopeLiterally all smoke and mirrors bullshit 'partnerships' paid for by sirgay by dumping on baggie's heads.If this is your only 'proof' then linktards are absolutely fucked.This shit isn't going anywhere.
>>58987544>No they didn'thaha ok>>58987548>smoke and mirrors bullshit 'partnerships'Yeah, Swift and DTCC are known for this. Which is why they're complete nobodies.
>>58987557Price baggie kekYou'll hold for another 7 years while the price does fuck all and none of this pie in the sky bullshit actually materialises
>>58987560>priceAnd there's the mother of all goalpost moves.Next time just start with that instead of constantly having to get backed into that corner.
>>58987567kek post price baggieahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha 7 YEARS OF HOLDING WITH NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT
>>58987577And you're STILL not selling kek
>>58987577>nothing to show for iti've retired and never have to work another day in my life from Chainlink, and that's while we're still early. I'm guessing you gave all yours away to Mashinsky et al, and he's living the dream in the RIviera, driving around in a nice Porsche paid for by your greed and stupidity. I wonder if Alex will have the Lobster Bisque or the Foie Gras for a starter today? Either way, i'm sure he'll raise a glass to you and all the free money you gave him. double-kek
>>58987597no you're not baggie>>58987593chart baggie
>>58987617>no you're nothurts, doesn't it?ah, if only you'd done things differently. never mind, you could always kys. no one will care anyway. you're nothing.
>>58987698>retired>desperately shilling his heavy heavy bags on /biz/ day in day outlmao, you're not fooling anyone stinker price baggie
>>58987702>you can't be retired!is that because no one on /biz bought back in 2017/18? is that what you're telling yourself?the holy cope from this disgusting tranny
>>58987708kek baggieit's over for your shitcoin
>>58986691I remember when the ISO standard was a nothingburger according to linkies when XSG schizos brought it up. 95% of link crumbles are old xerpers riddlers and talking points. Next stop is a general with riddlers.
>>58987775>95% of link crumbles are old xerpers riddlers and talking points.cripple crumbs:>Swift will use XRPSwift:>we will use Chainlinkyeah, not the same at all is it?
>>58987821True linkie, very smug. You dodge the point. the ISO never was a talking point for xrp, nor is it one for Link its a messaging standard, nothing more nothing less. yes swift will use CCIP link, for blockchain to blockchain communication. For the actual value transfer and payment rails there are others selected. These are hyperledger/overledger and multiple ledgers. The idea that link competes with xrp is comparing apples to pears.
>>58987916>yes swift will use CCIP link, for blockchain to blockchain communication>For the actual value transfer and payment rails there are others selectedTransferring RWAs from chain to chain is the same as transferring value. The whole point of RWAs is that they have value.Are you insane?
>>58987916Hilarious. How will you cope next time?First it was:>XRP will replace SWIFTThen>XRP will work WITH SWIFTAnd then SWIFT comes out and goes>We are working with Chainlink exclusivelyAnd now you are scrambling for something to cope with, what is it now?>dooooood yeah they might be using Chainlink BUT you know... what about the actual VALUE transfer? They will SURELY this time be working with XRPIm laughing my fucking ass off. Please never stop posting these insane fanfics. Its too funny and sad.
>>58987952link is not a tokenization platformlink needs other chains and ledgers to tokenize so they can facilitate transfersbeing a gatekeeper at the castle asking for a password is not the same as bringing in the actual value.link enables the locks and the keys in a safe way, its not what is stored in the safe. the internet enables payments , an internet provider does not get a piece of the value transfers on the internet, you pay for the connection to the internet. are you insane?
>>58987960for an oracle solution it might be they work exclusively with linkits not the only token or chain they work with, again missing the point. linkies have part of the puzzle, you dont own the pie but you act like you own it. link needs other chains to tokenize, you dont tokenize on your own. you are an ERC token lol.
>>58987965>link is not a tokenization platform>link needs other chains and ledgersAnd there are many dozens of those chains and ledgers, for institutions they're primarily private permissioned chains.The whole point of Chainlink/CCIP is that it doesn't matter where the tokenized assets are.
>>58987976>its not the only token or chain they work with>you dont own the pie but you act like you own itThe chain being used is pretty much irrelevant, and banks like to use their own in-house one anyway.Which explains why everyone tends to work with many chains, but only one solution to connect them all.
>>58987994Irrelevant? Tokenizing on any chain usually results in stables, platform specific tokens and wrapped tokens being put up as collateral. This is where the value is tokenized on. The value is on that chain. Link will then facilitate the value transfer. it will be first the chains that tokenize that will capture that value, then everything surrounding it taht enables that value to be transferred.
>>58987597>retired HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHIts the guy (fishycat) from the other thread who said he “retired” because he sold 10k coins at $50. I am fucking dying laughing. Holy shit this is hilariousNow lets look at the reality>no car>lives w parents>no girlfriend>30,000 posts on reddit FIRE sub>cuts out coupons>”no I better not do that, it’s a rip off”>heh heh, retirement is great>sits at computer all day anywaysLadies and gentlemen, the retired link marines. It’s such a good life, you need to brag about it on an anonymous dead forumTHE Cuckolds of crypto
>>58988008>capture valueTokenizing on a chain does not capture value for that chain.You seem confused.Suppose someone tokenizes a $1,000 bill on Chain X, the native coin of Chain X doesn't magically obtain the value of $1,000.At the very most you'll have some gas usage.
>>58988023hahahahaha fucking told that faggot fishy, well inlmao tell us more about how you're retired STINKER BITCH
>>58988031No but does drive demand, market efficiency and possibly valuation in the long term. Value that was dormant can now freely flow, that is what raises value.
>>58988066>but does drive demand, market efficiency and possibly valuation in the long termThrough usage, right?Now here's how that usage breaks down:1) nearly everything goes through Chainlinkand then 2) all the usage going through Chainlink gets split up into many dozens of chainsSo who has the better outlook on "demand, market efficiency and possibly valuation in the long term"?
>>58988075Is it not: nearly everything cross-chain goes through Chainlink? Link is not needed for interchain transfer right? that is what the native chain enables.Sure good outlook, but how is this enabling of value transfer valued by the market? in other words, how will price be affected and at what pace? Why is it still in the gutter , where can we see actual demand picking up that proves that link is indeed this value enabler. As with the arguments against ripplets, a partnership means nothing, where is the proof of use
Realizes long term gain of $490,000, after ~20% taxes, has $392,000.Buys absolute piece of shit house for $300,000, remaining funds $92,000IM RETIRED GUYSHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH
>>58988082>Link is not needed for interchain transfer right?Even here, Chainlink will be used to create the RWAs in the first place, for instance in order to provide pricing information (see DTCC's nav data).>how is this enabling of value transfer valued by the market?It isn't. It's mainly valued by Bitcoin moves.>how will price be affectedWhen full-on adoption happens, even Bitcoin moves won't matter.
>>58988093As in a call to provide the current price as input for further processing via contract. The argument here would be full scale tokenization and volume picking up?You are saying that its undervalued in a ''hidden'' way. As we are still in speculative market as long as we are not into full blown tokenization?
>>58988121>You are saying that its undervalued in a ''hidden'' way.Not hidden at all, Swift and DTCC can't stop talking about Chainlink.And neither can crypto partners like Fireblocks.>As we are still in speculative market as long as we are not into full blown tokenization?Yes.
>>58988133resulting conclusion is that link is the most asymmetric bet in crypto?
>>58988143You bet it is. It's rank 14. That's insane.
>>58988093>link will be used to create RWAMY SIDES. Just like link “link is going to be used” to create derivatives, decentralised crop insurance, NTFs, connect all of DEFI, bridge AI and DLT? Thats only the shit Sergey shilled and never did fuck all progress with before moving on to the next bullshit as he does.Now its “RWA”. How fucking stupid are you believing a word he says at this point?There will not be a single RWA made with Chainlink and that goes especially between now and when he moves on to his next bullshit and stops talking about RWA for it
>>58988165>Just like link “link is going to be used” to create derivatives, decentralised crop insurance, NTFs, connect all of DEFI, bridge AI and DLT?>Now its “RWA”yes.Ask DTCC. They're working on using nav data provided by Chainlink to create RWAs.And you're acting like we haven't known for years that oracles are extremely versatile. Most of us bought for that exact reason.
>>58988165>abritrum will save link!!>actually ISO202220222 will save link!!>actually deco! proof of reserves!!>CCIP will save link!!!>RWA will save link!!!lmaoooo, everything turned out to be a massive flop while sirgay just dangles the next carrot in front of the cult and they lap it up.Pathetic stinkers.
>>58988188>sirgay just dangles the next carrotWell him and the fucking DTCC kek
Honestly at this point im more excited about LINK being back to ICO levels in 3-4 years than i ever was about it being $1000 EOY when i held it, even in the early days in 2018.Cant wait to see these fucking retard cultists and CLL employees fucked for gaslighting and being fucking retards.Get in in your heads: I couldn’t give a fuck if you baghold or sell, i actually rather you retards baghold. Everyone with a brain worth conversing with already sold.At best, you have a new generation of holders who bought lately, have no idea about the history, have not experienced Sergeys track record…. However there arent many of them hence the price collapse. Nobody is interested.
>>58988209'partnerships', 'pilots' and 'experiments' that are paid for by sirgay don't mean anything.
>>58988233>paid for by sirgaykek the ultimate cope
>>58988239Anon, its the local explanation for it everyone with a brain comes to after years of exposure to Sergeys carrots.You’re the retard who cant see a carrot for a carrot at this point.
>>58988254Ripple has a lot more money, and their entire reason for existence is institutions and banks.Where are their collabs with DTCC, Swift, Euroclear, ... if it's just a matter of paying them?
>>58988261Of course it is you idiot. Ripple literally had these kinds of muh collaborations years ago when it was the face of DLT for financial institutions because nothing else existed for them to show “we’re looking into it with out R&D!” While getting paid off in the form of lobbying or whatever.Now there is a better fit to check that box, in Chainlink, so the same fucking shit again. Sergey pays for it to happen via lobbying or whatever the fuck he needs to do, they check their box for DLT in the R&D departments with something more appropriate than XRP was. Done.It doesn’t mean fuck all else in terms of products or production. Its just 7 year pocs, endless pocs, sergey paying his way to get them… and turning it into his favourite carrot
>>58988273>Ripple literally had these kinds of muh collaborations years agoHoly shit no they did not.Where is Swift? Where is DTCC? Where is anything even remotely close to that?
>>58988278Funny, exactly the response i expected from a baggie. Getting angry and with some lame ps3 vs xbox tier response. Muh partnerships are better than yours.Completely missing the point, but thats how it works for you baggies.If XRP launched in 2017, it’d have the same tier muh partnerships as LINK does now. Same grifts
>>58988296>Muh partnerships are better than yours.When did ripple ever have any actual collaboration with any party even remotely as big as Swift or DTCC?
>>58988298anon, a literal US treasurer sits at the board of directors of Ripple, not a partnership, not an advisory role, but rather an executive rolethat is bigger than anything Chainlink has ever accomplished, yet at the same time is meaninglessthe ultimate cope is >everything crypto related might be vaporware, but our vaporware is closer than anything less to shipping something!that's all you have left
>>58988306>a literal US treasurer sits at the board of directors of RippleThat's not a collaboration, that's a hire. That person no longer represents anyone or anything other than herself.Ripple never had any collaboration with any party even remotely as big as Swift.Or DTCC.Or Arkinvest.Or if we're talking actual integrations; even fucking Coinbase, Maker, Compound, ...
>>58988314>collaborations and experiments are more important than a US former treasurer we agree to disagree I believe both of them are meaningless
Muh PS3 doesnt have>halo 3>gears of war>project gothamPs3 never have anything close to this tier of game!!!!! Hiw can you comparee11!! Never call ps3 a real console again!!!Thats literally what linkies sound like these days when rightly comparing to XRP, the same kind of grift just earlier and less well executed
>>58988333>"haha Chainlink paid for its partnerships">closest example of a Ripple equivalent is a literal paid executive position Congrats, you played yourself.Big fucking check though.And collaborations with the biggest institutions in the world are far from meaningless. It's the most meaningful thing that happened to crypto, ever.
>>58988341haha, you're the one claiming that paid collaborations between blockchain departments of legacy entities are a bigger deal than a high profile paid executiveI'm claiming they're equally meaninglessso again, we agree to disagree
>>58988359>paid collaborationsZero indication that these are paid.If they were, half the top 100 would have Swift collabs.>a bigger deal than a high profile paid executiveA paid executive IS a literal paid collab.And she's not affiliated with anything anymore, she's there as a private person.>I'm claiming they're equally meaninglessThey couldn't be further apart.One is the future of crypto AND finance in general.The other is a paid position.
>>58988359You dont get it.These employees/hires only matter when its chainlink employing people like Kemal from google, or the derezin or whoever it was from Linkedin… or the “advisor” Schmidt.However it doesn’t matter and isn’t important again when all of them leave within 2 years, as they did of course.Were baggies not ecstatic over some roasty who worked at swift getting employed at CLL lately?
>>58988378>These employees/hires only matter when its chainlink employing people like Kemal from google, or the derezin or whoever it was from Linkedin… or the “advisor” Schmidt.A big hire is great news.But a collab with a financial giant is huge.
>>58988366>half the top 100 would have Swift collabswhy? they don't need Swift to pump, actually nobody ever needed Swift to pump>IS meaningless, yes>THE FUTUREno, it's legacy entities experimenting with experimental, flawed, and unpolished tech, with zero products insight after 15 yearsor 10, if you want to include Sergey's endeavors onlyanon, none of those things matter until a product is shipped, and until that happens, you're relying on speculation only, which leads to the PA you see nowI won't consider LINK as a serious investment until it finally does something, price wise or tech wise >inb4 huuurrrr you'll miss the pump!there's absolutely no rush at all, if LINK does what you're all hoping for, even an entry at $100 will be greattl:dr I disagree with your autistic premises, move on
>>58988389You're going off the deep end, I'm not reading all that shit.
>>58988397you're shit at your job m8
>>58988400Yeah he works for CLL, obviously a wagie there.Its very typical with them. They defend s lot and engage then get tired and start doing one liners and insults like that.They aren’t from 4chan and it shows.
>>58988400>>58988409>They aren’t from 4chan and it shows.t. the most obvious samefag in the history of the chans
>>58988419
>>58988455That's probably the worst thing you could've posted in response
>>58988516retard, you should have put the t in green textomg, ur sooo dumb
>>58986579Sending instructions means you can program the tokens to do things after they move to a new bridge. This is what lets you design Xapps, cross dapps. If you release a dapp on Ethereum and Binance, you have to manage them separately. They'll have separate users, separate liquidity pools (if your project needs it), you have to update the contracts of each protocol individually. With a Xapp, everything works in tandem and the user can operate on whichever chain they want that the Xapp is deployed to. Basically imagine if Android and iOS versions of an app could not communicate with each other; if you were playing a multiplayer game, you could only interact with players playing the same version. This is the equivalent of what CCIP solves right now.But you can imagine why this isn't taking off in the public permissionless space. There's no novel idea that requires an app to utilize multiple blockchains in tandem and you'd have to rearchitect your released protocol to take advantage of this to merge your blockchain specific install bases together.
>>58987965>link is not a tokenization platformLink provides the components for tokenization and the ability to trade it efficiently. This leads me to the second part of >>58988711. While the public permissionless space is not too gungho about CCIP, the permissioned, private side loves it. You are correct in that Link needs chains. But the chain the part, you're overvaluing. Anyone and everyone is spinning up an EVM chain. However, they're still connecting to Chainlink's network of networks because NFTs (namely RWAs or ones with value representing the outside world) simply cannot live, cannot breathe if they're not connected to an Oracle network. You can mint an NFT. But then you need an oracle to connect it to whatever it's being represented in the outside world. It must always be connected so you have a constant communication line so that whatever is happening to the entity in the real world is accurately reflected on the blockchain. Then, if you want to trade it to someone else, if they're on another blockchain, you'll be using Chainlink's interblockchain communication protocol as well. It's the standard in that ecosystem.Chainlink has already captured an entire budding market that most people don't have access to. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZK__sWFTUU
>>58988760okay you sound like an insider to me. not asking you to confirm that. can you tell me, though; do you think marines will have cause to be celebrating before the end of this year?
>>58989094he sounds like a typical stink marine to me
>>58989094Everything I've said is all public information.
>>58989381regardless, what do you think?
>>58989448Objectively speaking, they're saying adoption comes into swing next year or so. But really you should be thinking about how you can personally leverage the tools available to design protocols that better society through the use of smart contracts.
>>58989498>But really you should be thinking about how you can personally leverage the tools available to design protocols that better society through the use of smart contracts.but...but that's WORK. you're asking me to WORK.
>>58989498i don't know anything about programming, so that idea's out.
>>58986691God we're so fucking far from this being relevant. I'm in pain.
>>58989498>UUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM HOW DARE YOU EXPECT THE PRICE TO GO UP?????:?>ummmmm yeah you need to do hackathons you stupid fucking baggieLmao, chainshit advocates, not even once.
>Chainlink has already captured an entire budding market that most people don't have access tothe same way I've captured all of the world's oxygen by walking outside >>58989094>okay you sound like an insider to mehe is reciting lines provided to him by the founders>>58989498and there's the cop out >Despite its internal culture of obfuscation, Enron projected an illusion of transparency, largely through a sophisticated public relations strategy. The company's charismatic leaders, Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling, were often seen on financial networks and at industry conferences, extolling Enron's virtues and its role as a market innovator.>The company's annual reports and press releases were masterclasses in euphemism and grandiosity. Technical jargon and ambiguous language created an aura of complexity that dissuaded scrutiny. Questions were deflected with a common refrain: Enron was too innovative to be understood by the uninitiated.
>>58986110
I am a baggie OOoooOOOooOoOOooOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
I'm still poor.
