🌍 #Chainlink community meetups are where #Web3 builders connect to learn about the latest #Web3 innovations. This week, there are two Chainlink meetups in #Izmir and #Austin 📆⬇️

t.co

t.co

In this new research post, Chainlink Labs Chief Scientist Ari Juels explores how Chainlink DECO could help simplify key management by enabling users to safely recover crypto keys through authentication to websites of their choice.

blog.chain.link

#Web3 is disrupting the $300B+ #gaming industry—presenting an exciting opportunity for developers. Selecting the right tools, services, & platforms can help devs build a successful blockchain-based game. Explore launchpads, accelerators, & more 🎮👇

t.co

Ok, after reading the article with more attention, I must say that I have learned many new aspects when it comes to token payment mechanisms within the Chainlink Network. Aspects that might seem overly clear to node operators and people with technical skills, but probably not to a lot of people within the community that lack such insights. Great job explaining it to us like if we were 5-year old kids, Jonny. My initial doubt has been cleared, and subsequently all the other questions that arose from that doubt too. I guess I owe Sergey an apology, though I still stubbornly think this could have been prevented had he himself given a bit more details on such a sensitive subject. But if any of the admins gets to talk with him, tell him I love him regardless ;) Love this community, man, excited for its future. Stay based brothers and sisters. 🙌🏻

twitter.com

Great insights. I believe there're many details that often slip under the radar for the broader community. Thanks for taking the time.

Hashing involves converting data of arbitrary length to a fixed length, making data storage and retrieval easy and efficient. Understand hashing in under 60 seconds with this #ChainDev short 📺👇

t.co

t.co

Self-Custody—With a Little Help From Chainlink DECO

blog.chain.link

It's just a cool statistic.

It can be used as an index

TVE is~ to the same paradox as market cap. It’s not a bad indicator, but has the same weaknesses

⬡ DAILY WRAP-UP ⬡ ⛓️ Integrations on #BNBChain ⛓️ • @0xfilswan | BUILD | Driving decentralized storage and compute adoption • @KnightEcosystem | VRF | Powering raffle system • @LuderProtocol | VRF | Selecting raffle winners

t.co

sure :)

Gonna dm you quick

to ask

no havent talked to anyone i was just wondering and came here

Yes absolutely! Are you already talking to some folks on the Chainlink side about your use of the protocol?

in our project

as we are also using chainlink to some of our features

should we apply to be listed

chainlinkecosystem.com 🙂

or website

i was wondering if you list the ecosystems that uses chainlink on any documents you have

Always are, how can we help you?

Hey guys any admin on ?

Permissionless composability enables developers to combine multiple apps and services to build any use case. Discover how this unique property of #DeFi is fueling rapid, frictionless innovation cycles ⬇️

t.co

t.co

gogogo link

Please be aware that there is no price, market, trading, or yield farming discussions allowed in the Chainlink official channels. Please find an unofficial channel if that is what you want to talk about. You can find some groups by searching Telegram for "Chainlink Community" but be aware that they are not operated or endorsed by the Chainlink team or admins of this chat.

but link is underperforming and has gone nowhere despite broader market pumping up . wonder if anything is not right that potentially makes investors overlook the coin

Hi there, Chainlink doesn't typically pre-announce announcements. You can see a list of all the relevant global events here and stay up to date with the latest news by following in our Twitter accouint 💪

307128

do u have any upcoming chainlink news or partnerships? is anything coming up?

Any yield-generating opportunities, if any, would involve lending or yield farming, which is out of the scope of Chainlink official channels given that price, investments, and trading discussions are not allowed 👍

In this new research post, @chainlinklabs Chief Scientist @AriJuels explores how #Chainlink DECO could help simplify key management by enabling users to safely recover crypto keys through authentication to websites of their choice.

t.co

Regarding the TVL vs TVS debate, I think it's totally irrelevant. I totally agree with @LinkedEric views.

You see, I have complete trust in the Chainlink team and their commitment to the community. I just don't trust the inherent nature of financial markets where game theory pressures usually squeezes out the little people from value capture over time...

Give it to em Yarci

Hi, how many developers the chainlink have?

And I fully understand that, as I explained in the introduction of my post. But when it comes to a modification to the token utility, even if it is just a slight modification, and you basically say: >LINK token as payment mechanism is creating some friction among users >We will solve this by allowing payments in native tokens + premium In just a few phrases, no further explanation. This opens the Pandoras Box of possibilities, imv. You see, now one has to wonder if going forward, LINK as a payment token might become a huge technical and economical hurdle for mass adoption, and if that is so, then it is logical that you solve that problem so that top users are happy. The Chainlink network what matters. Right? How far will this go? Will the token be slowly phased out and fully replaced within 5 to 10 years with native token payments? How much power will "users" or "top users" be able to exert over Chainlinks' managament in the future? is one question that pops into mind also. What if SWIFT and other enterprises consider the LINK token to be a friction too? What if "top users", or top NOPs claim they are not happy with non-active community members being allowed to stake their LINK going forward? That all future allocations will be NOP only? Will the community members be slowly squeezed out of the value capture? Which is what normally happens in the Financial world. I fully understand the struggle to keep adapting to the fast-growing Web3.0 environment, I fully understand you want to keep "top users" happy, and you want to keep adding customers, and expanding nodes and services, and you have to keep adapting to survive. And Chainlink has done a hell of a job on that front. No doubt. But when it comes to "adapting" the token... You'd better give a more detailed explanation... Sergey raised more questions than resolving doubts in this case. I can understand this was not his intention, of course. But I think it is a bit sloppy.

Dustin, this is the first time ever in 5 years that Sergey mentions that for some users, whether these are "top users" or not, that payments in LINK tokens creates a friction to them. And that they will solve this by allowing payments in native tokens. Which can then be swapped to LINK. Never before has he addressed this. Never before was this mentioned as a possibility in any of the white papers. So it opens up a lot of speculative questions which could be answered quite simply by adding a bit more details.

If they do change it and Link assumes the "premium" it would be nice that the premium goes to burning link or better yet a buy back. That would be a win win right or am I not understanding?

Chainlink Staking v0.1 is already out on staking.chain.link, however the pool is already filled. Keep an eye out on our various channel like Twitter, Discord, and this Telegram to stay up-to-date on future pool expansion

@Fifi5684 Staking is out but full. More staking will be coming in the future.

@LinkedEric @Shogun187 Looking for Admins...

You are a scammer

Is staking out yet?

Lending protocol @eulerfinance integrated #Chainlink Price Feeds to help ensure that collateralization ratios are calculated based on tamper-proof market data. Watch the video to understand how the integration helped increase user confidence in the #DeFi platform 📺👇

t.co

Euler Labs Head of Risk @MacroMate8 sat down with @Chainlink to chat about how Chainlink Price Feeds help protect against tail risks and outlier events related to price manipulation, helping to provide a secure experience for users. Check it out below:

t.co

Thanks. Just realised, James from the Chainlink Labs Data Science team gave some feedback. Keen to see if the discussion evolves further in the forum.

I don’t have the exact methodology to provide but yeah it’s more expansive than DEX volume, any type of transaction value facilitated by oracles

I understand it's far more complex than the Uniswap exemple, but if you understand how TVE is calculated, it would be awesome to have some overview/exemples breaking it down so we can actually understand what we're actually looking at. Mr Wallach made a big effort tryna figure it out. However, his estimates are quite different.

t.me

The pushback is generally about network monetization from what I’ve seen, but that’s a different topic really, but yeah data charts are good to have

I think you’re getting pushback now with how it is displayed

Ok fine this is better

So did Chainlink previously

twitter.com

At least they put a chart

It’s not that uncommon imo, cumulative just tells a different story than a different time frame, since it starts at 2022, you can consider $7T to be the yearly TVE (for 2022)

twitter.com

Agreed but volume is often used on shorter time frames and flow data is compared. Daily volume, monthly volume or annual volume. Cumulative TVE is great for promoting but poor for analytics. Cumulative TVE of ethereum could be more than all the money in the world. I haven’t done the math.

Okey i understand 🙏

TVS = Total Value Secured, not Transaction Value per Second, has nothing to do with throughput, it's TVL secured

TVE is a flow based metric a bit like trading volume, while TVS is a point-in-time metric like TVL, I think both have their place, they explain different things

Okey i understand better. You should be a little more clear next time.🙏

As I mentioned previously, the blog provides insight into the goals and vision for 2023, and specifically what the high level goals are for the network's economics. So I imagine as monetization strategies continue to develop, more info can be provided on the specifics. There's a lot of variables involved and a lot of Chainlink services, each with their own unique economic structure. The goal is increasing network revenue in aggregate, which ultimately leads to more fees that can be made available to LINK stakers over time (which yes includes community stakers). So I don't have specifics on the implementation details, however, I do definitely disagree with the last comment of not sharing information regarding future economic development goals until every last question can be answered. It's just not how iterative agile development works as the alterative is saying nothing until it's already done, leaving people wondering what's being worked on, which is not ideal and also creates questions. Showcasing what direction Chainlink aims to take is not about hyping an "important innovation" but showing what's being worked on. Yes this leads to questions, but creating a long-term sustainable monetization model for oracles has challenges and is unchartered waters. Approaches will be tested, assumptions checked, pivots made as needed to continuously iterate towards the goal of network sustainability that people want to see.

Thanks for the feedback. However, by TVS I meant Total Value Secured by Chainlink services.

My issue with TVE is that it is a cumulative metric. It is like cumulative transaction count. It is a useful metric for marketing but not so much about current state of network.

It depends on one's perspective and what they believe is fair. Some people may argue that it is fair for decentralized finance (DeFi) to take the majority of the money, as it is providing valuable financial services to users and allowing them to access a wider range of financial products and opportunities. Others may argue that the link nodes that are responsible for maintaining the network and facilitating transactions should be fairly compensated for their work. These nodes play an important role in the functioning of the DeFi ecosystem, and without them, the network would not be able to operate. It's worth noting that, the current state of DeFi is still in its early stage, and the distribution of rewards and incentives is still being worked out. It is important to keep in mind that the goal of DeFi is to create a decentralized and fair financial system, and that all the stakeholders should be fairly compensated for their work. It is also important to keep in mind that, the more decentralized and distributed the network is, the stronger it becomes and the less likely it is to be controlled by a few large players. It is also essential that the network is as inclusive as possible, not just in terms of who can participate but also in terms of how rewards and incentives are distributed. In summary, the distribution of rewards and incentives in the DeFi ecosystem is a complex issue and it is important to consider the roles and contributions of all stakeholders. It is also important to work towards a decentralized and inclusive ecosystem.

TVS (Transaction Value per Second) is a metric that is used to measure the performance of a blockchain. It represents the number of transactions that can be processed per second by the blockchain. CCIP (Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol) is a protocol that allows for the movement of assets across different blockchain networks. CCIP allows different blockchains to communicate with each other and facilitate the transfer of assets between them. TVS is an important metric to consider, as it measures the capability of a blockchain to handle high transaction loads. However, it is not the only relevant metric when it comes to assessing the performance of a blockchain with CCIP. Other factors such as security, scalability, and interoperability are also important to consider. For example, security is particularly important when it comes to cross-chain transactions, as they involve moving assets across different networks with different security models. Interoperability is also crucial, as it ensures that different blockchains can communicate and work together effectively. Scalability is important too, since the more blockchains are involved in the transaction the more resources are needed to process it. In summary, TVS is a valuable metric for measuring the performance of a blockchain but it should not be the only one taken into consideration when assessing the performance of a blockchain with CCIP, other factors such as security, scalability and interoperability should also be evaluated.

Good to have you here; this was posted earlier by another member in case you'd like to share some of your thoughts: "Just wanted to share more details and my thoughts with everybody on why it bugged me that Sergey did not share more details on his plan and left me more confused than enlightened. First, I understand that sometimes initial ideas (white papers) become quickly outdated in a fast evolving and expanding technological world. The ones that adapt their ideas stand a better chance of survival. I think Chainlink so far has successfully adapted to this fast evolving landscape of ever more complicated smart contracts. Chainlink is creating a tool box and a market place where node operators, API sellers, and clients can come together and create wonderful stuff. Chainlink is fully focused on providing the best quality to all users and service providers. This is how it will be able to expand and grow and corner this market as a tech company. Chainlink is working hard to eliminate as much friction as it possibly can, to make this market place a smooth and cheap environment. Increase scalability, reduce costs, and make the interaction as frictionless as possible for everybody. It is how you end up outcompeting your competitors and become the standard. So in that sense I can understand that if the LINK token as a payment token became a friction (for some users) somewhere along the line of the evolution, that one would adapt and propose a solution to solve that friction. In the end, the Chainlink Network is more important than whatever initial utility was planned for the token. Either Chainlink itself, or some users, have detected a certain friction, and Sergey explained that they are currently developing a solution which will accept other tokens as payment which can then be swapped into LINK. Apparently some users are willing to pay a premium to avoid said friction. And here is where questions start popping into my mind. >What exactly is creating this friction? >Is it a technical (scalability) or economical (high cost) friction? >Where is the friction being displaced to? Who is taking over said friction? >Who is getting paid a premium to take over that pain? Chainlink itself? Who? >Will any project with any innate token be able to subscribe to this? >What are the possible risks with certain illiquid and volatile tokens? >Does this have to do with low-latency oracles? >Is Chainlink absorbing said friction to be able to become more competitive with low-latency oracles and capture more clients? (Synthetix?). >Can low-latency oracles work with LINK token payments? >Sergey’s latest Tweet ends with: “Value capture and adapting to top user needs are also key goals”. I agree, but, to what point will top user needs and their value capture influence the future of the LINK token’s role in the future of the Chainlink Network? >Will SWIFT and other enterprises end up proposing to change CCIP & DECO payments in other assets (CBDC or stablecoin) instead of LINK, to avoid friction, volatility, and possible regulatory hurdles? (Adopting to top user needs) >Will the LINK token utility slowly be reduced to only maintain its collateral for staking properties because it creates too much friction for mass adoption? >If in the future it will only retain its collateral utility in staking, will community members still be able to join the staking network going forward or will it be closed off for NOPs only? (Value capture will be only for thise actively participating in the Network and non-participating community members will have reduced or no access going forward) And many more that come to mind but don't want to spam too much. I'm not emotional, or worried, or creating FUD. I just believe that if one cant yet share details on a new important innovation (either because you are still figuring it out or whatever reason) then one should simply not share it at all cause it will just raise more questions than that it will answer. Cheers guys

In this new T Challenge podcast, @ChainlinkLabs’ William Herkelrath, @RonMarquardtPhD of @TMobile, & @raketenvogel of @deutschetelekom explore how #Web3 unlocks new business models & how #Chainlink is connecting enterprises to the #blockchain economy:

t.co

Do you think TVS is the only relevant metric once CCIP starts moving assets across chains?

I assume more information will be provided over time as these monetization strategies develop, the blog provides insight into what’s planned, so the community knows what the focus is for the year, personally I see a large monetization opportunity and making it easier to pay means more fees can be made available to LINK stakers over time, which you should want The Chainlink protocol, incl economics, is a continual refinement, there are many factors at play

I saw that. I’m curious for this development

So in theory the network could enable a x100 700 trillion and only make 5 billion $ in fees?

TVE is a metric that showcases Chainlink’s adoption and role in Web3, that’s why it was shown. You’re asking about Chainlink monetization, which is something that Chainlink has said they’re focusing on this year via fee-sharing, subscriptions, and usage based fees. A network that secures a large amount of value has a greater monetization opportunity than one that doesn’t. Everyone wants to see the Chainlink network generate lots of revenue, but you can only engage in effective monetization once you have the sufficient network effects, Chainlink is now reaching that stage.

The TVE number is just completely useless and chainlink only started using it because TVL dumped

Consider reviewing this very recent blogpost, which provides a forward looking view of the Chainlink Network

blog.chain.link

I work for one of the longest running Chainlink node operators. The Chainlink Network is in a growth and enablement phase, and expanding the usecases for onchain applications is a longterm investment. Hampering that growth by charging usurious fees is not a strategy that pays off longterm.

You think its fine if defi takes all of the money and the link nodes get a couple of crumbs?

So you prefer to basically run a charity?

Seems like we have categorically opposing viewpoints. You would prefer the Chainlink Network cost more for developers to use? Cant say Ill ever agree with you.

My point is chainlink likes to boast about this number even though only 0.0007% of this number has been collected in fees. Its highly uneconomical

Im asking you what you mean by "how is this relevant"

It absolutely would be more relevant. The network barely scrapes the crumbs of this so called TVE

How is what relevant? Would it be better if the Chainlink Network captured 50% of that value? I see this massive enablement as a net positive. The Chainlink Network has enabled a cambrian explosion of onchain activity while generating meaningful income for its node operators WITHOUT being rent-seeking and hampering the growth of onchain activity with onerous usurious fees

However node operators only captured 0.0007% of this TVE so how is this relevant? (50 million fees divided by 7 trillion $ enabled)

Hi Kim, you can view the difference in magnitude between those numbers as a positive - I do personally, as a Chainlink node operator. The Chainlink Network's massive impact has enabled trillions of dollars of transactions in DeFi, which may be loans originated through applications like Aave, NFTs with random characteristics minted using VRF, bets placed on applications like Overtime Markets, and automatic rebalancing of underlying collateral etc through Chainlink Automation.

Everyone, please keep calm and respect each other. This is a forum for community discussion, but you do not need to make personal attacks

You couldn’t answer yarcis questions either. So is there anyone here who can answer it?

So you dont know, got it. Could have said so earlier

Sorry I’m not paid to

So answer my question since you seem to know it. It isnt answered by the blogposts

ty josh my anticipation is palpable

Spoon feeding people gets tiring.

I dont see the point in posting this when this so called large TVE number barely results in fee collected by nodes

Yes

Fees collected are roughly 50-60 million on a yearly basis. Yet chainlink claims to enable trillions . How does this result in fees to the nodes? It barely does

Is this your question?

Please be polite on this channel. No need to be rude. Thank you.

Scroll up, you are getting paid for this

Sorry, which is your question? You've posted a bit here, and I'm not sure what you are referencing.

I hear you, and I have shared with the team that there are some long time community members who would like clarity on Sergey's latest blogpost outlining more details for Chainlink Economics 2.0.

Such as this. Didnt even read my question. Its just insanity

Complete disregard of his earliest supporters, promoting scams and quietly removing associations with them. Questions are not answered, instead people just repost blogposts. Vague decisions, such as his latest post about also accepting other tokens

Chainlink Network has securely enabled $7 trillion in transactional value, showcasing the network’s adoption and role in the powering the DeFi ecosystem’s growth:

chain.link

December 2017 but yeah we're splitting hairs at that point

Sergey has done it well, communitt advocates take all the heat and nothing reaches him

Im tired of these mental gymnastics performed by chainlink

which is also normal btw, wouldn’t expect it to be otherwise tbh

Oh so you also bought october 1st 2017?

Lol homie I can assure you, I've been here long before you have. I post the blogs cause if you'd read them, you wouldn't have said, there's no definition or explaining what TVE is

Exactly and fees are minuscule compared to the TVE chainlink loves to boast about

it doesn’t really matter, fee do

Literally a useless cookie cutter answer. Reposting a blogpost. Don’t you think we havent read this? Most of us have been in link long before the community advocates

it feels quite normal that TVS figures trigger discussion, i mean this isn’t well defined and you could be strict or loose in what you include in there

12+ Key Metrics for the Rapidly Expanding Web3 Ecosystem | Chainlink

blog.chain.link

Blockchain Oracles for Hybrid Smart Contracts | Chainlink https://chain.link/#:~:text=Transaction%20value%20enabled%20(TVE)%20is,protocol%20during%20a%20given%20period.

As shown on market dot link

Fees collected are roughly 50-60 million on a yearly basis. Yet chainlink claims to enable trillions . How does this result in fees to the nodes? It barely does

In the spirit of truth and transparency, show your math

In fact, nodes in aggregate have made 0.0007% of the TVE enabled

Why is this number shared proudly while it has hardly any effect on value capture

We just have to take your word for it.

What happened to truth>trust? It’s meaningless without transparency.

Same reason - it's their Twitter. Why wouldn't the post it?

I think he means why post it on Twitter

It's the Chainlink telegram sir; we discuss Chainlink.

Nah

staking, revenue sharing

Sorry, Quid Pro Quo.. I thought you were Eric Wallach

So whats the point of posting this?

In fact, nodes in aggregate have made 0.0007% of the TVE enabled

I don’t know you

Was actually thinking about you mate. Thanks for the update

Its not really something to celebrate

In aggregate

I find it strange how they keep posting about the so called trillions enabled yet nodes have made not even 1% of that number in fees

www.smartcontractresearch.org

Unfortunately the team has not been transparent about how they reach that number

Happy 7 trillion TVE milestone everyone!

There is an abundance of documentation that details the use

So whats the point of the link token then?

⬡ Network Milestone ⬡ The #Chainlink Network has surpassed $7 trillion in transaction value enabled (TVE)—a measure of aggregate USD value of on-chain transactions facilitated by Chainlink oracles across 12 blockchains since the start of 2022.

t.co

possibly link risks becoming a security and some actors do not want to bother buying securities to pay oracles, they’d rather pay in stables or btc or whatnot

imho CowSwap is one of the smartest protocols on Ethereum, it greatly improves the user experience because users don't have to worry about their Ether balances* (reduces friction), even though ETH is still used on the backend. The better the user experience, the easier it will be to attract the next billion users. The payment mechanism overview explained on the blog post, explicitly states that it will result 'in a total increase in LINK consumption'. I agree that it would be nice to have more details on such a mechanism, but even with the limited information available, I think it already makes a lot of sense.

Do not talk down on yourself, sir. You are a great representation of the community, and if the team is prudent, they will seriously look into your points.

Okay wagie

I would expect early adopters to better understand the network

There's a very high chance that some of us in this group have way more link than you, and Yarci is an earlier adopter than you. Know your place, sir.

RT @SmartContract: .@KartoCars has integrated #Chainlink VRF on #Ethereum to help randomize its NFT mint. Explore how VRF helps unlock fai…