is he talking in regards to CLPR? why else would he talk about Chainlink being replaced? wtf
>>62275877Checked and ikd but it's telling how Chris/fishy/juels et al are ignoring CLPR like their lifes depend on it.
>>62275893>CLPRIs this the new talking point? A acronym we have never heard of is another chainlink killer?
>>62275918yes its very 'organically' being spammed across this board right now in every thread, not being shilled directly because they know that doesn't work here (they tried one thread and got no traction). hedera shills are the least organic in the space, likely because they're mostly bought/paid for, another anon saved screen caps of their payout program for the shills. also the leemon face memes are awful, just being ugly is not enough to create a meme you fucking jeets.
>>62275930Yes it is in every thread right now becase I am posting about it nigger, because I hold LINK and find it strange how everyone is just fucking ignoring it ok? How about you discuss the tech instead of making up stories about hedera shills.
>>62276007nobody is ignoring it 'nigger' (oh wow you're clearly from here so impressed), nobody's making up stories if you've been on this board for years you'd know, the fact you chose to get offended about that says it all though. also "discuss the tech" kek there's nothing to discuss, if there was you and the hbar shills would be doing it. you're just spamming buzzword and pretending to be fearful uncertain doubtful link baggies.
>>62276018wordswordswords yet you said nothing regarding CLPR, only adhoms directed at me, because you did zero fucking research on this CLPR thing and are just complacent that whatever this new tech is it won't kill CCIP.You remind me of xerpies with their head in the sand not wanting to listen about anything chainlink is doing and still talking about muh nostro vostro acounts.
>>62276041bro only time will tell if it will kill CCIPIm sure DTCC / SWIFT / euroclear are willing to switch to this brand new wonder technology after working with Chainlink for +10 years
>>62276069>Im sure DTCC / SWIFT / euroclear are willing to switch to this brand new wonder technology after working with Chainlink for +10 yearsThe thing is that DTCC is not even using CCIP, they will be using CRE as far as I can see.It's not like this CLPR thing makes all of Chainlink obsolete, just CCIP.
>>62276085CCIP is part of CRE...
>>62276041>wordswordswordsoh the ironing
>>62276088No CRE is the orchestration layer but you can use CRE without using CCIP.
kek this is literally what one of the hired shills posted in another thread (they're spamming it in like 10 different threads now):>I'd say chainlink has sizeable state in HBAR. Sergey is not dumb he knew the writing was on he wall when no oher DLT could be as fast or cheap as HBAR.you need to hire better indians lmao
>>62276103Whatever helps you sleep at night kiddo. If theyre not using CCIP, what are they using/testing?https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/Downloads/DTCC-Connection/Smart_NAV-Report.pdf
