Lol this a joke

>>60563262 (OP)
Eh, that's 6%. Moonpay is 4.5%.

>>60563262 (OP)
this will drive adoption

Real LINK marines have zero problem with paying a little extra to support the hard work of Sergey and his team.

>>60563280

Thins. We don’t buy LINK for price. We buy it for the tech and the team.

>>60563288
>Thins
Um, sweaty, we don't like that around here. We like our scamm-uh, I mean, crypto pioneers, to be thicc.

>>60563262 (OP)
I pay 0% with ACH deposits on Gemini then like .2% or less on the actual purchase. People are straight retarded.

>>60563262 (OP)
Ngl this isn't a good look for Chain Link

>>60563312
I sold and never looked back.

>billions
lmao, what a fucking liar

OH FUCKFUCKFUCK I SHOULD HAVE BOUGHT 5G

>>60563262 (OP)
>>60563271
>>60563278
>>60563280
>>60563288


XRP has near zero fees btw. Like $0.00001 per transaction.

>>60563356
That’s because you can’t do anything useful with it

>>60563278
Look closer at the network (ccip) fee

>>60563339
The british do not deserve to use it.


Good fuck you

>>60563356
Sounds great. Please show me how you can use the network to buy and trade crypto.

>>60563262 (OP)
>>60563278
>>60563280
>>60563288
>>60563312
Fud bots trying to push the angle that link is anything except the network fee
All fields

>>60563271
>Moonpay is 4.5%
And Moonpay is almost entirely an off-chain system.

>>60563356
KEK so show us how to buy any crypto on chain using a credit card. Via XRP.

>>60563416
When I make it with LINK I will use my profits to fund the genocide of every single last streetshitter.

Go to xswap.link if you want to see how much CCIP fees are really going to be

>>60563476
kys jeet filth

>>60563483
Anon the fee is just 3 dollars to swap. This aint fud or copium. Chainlink is about to have its amazon moment where revenue grows exponentially

>>60563476
holy based buut why would anyone use this shit?

>>60563488
I might to see how it works since i can stomach throwing away pocket change

>>60563490
I dont understand why you would or anyone would want to do that?

>>60563494
Its 3 dollars. Is that a life changing amount for you?

>>60563488
I can answer that for you as well but ill have to get home first

>>60563476
>97% slippage
wouldn't it make more sense to convert the bnb to usdc then swap for avax on the other side instead of literally attempting to swap bnb in whatever tiny liquidity pool is on avax (not xswap's fault but lel I hope users are literate enough to not make swaps like this one)

>>60563487
Why?

You said it yourself, 3 dollars is like a quarter link

>>60563530
Nah ill answer on a real world case basis but im at the gym so my mind is busy rn. Ill get back to you in like 30 minutes

>>60563524
Idk i just did something that was completely incompatible with each other a direct swap between two different chains. You could probably do that

While im at the gym, let me ask you this. If walmart coin (A) is on vechain and they need to directly interact with jpmorgan coin (B) via either direct swap or others. How could they achieve this? No wrong answers

>>60563536
there's no walmart : jpmorgan liquidity pool, so either they atomic swap after each agreeing to the trade quantity or they need to swap into something more liquid like ether or a stablecoin, transfer, then buy the target coin

>>60563262 (OP)
Can't you already do this shit on Bybit? What makes it so special.

>>60563562
Bybit does the entire thing offchain as a paper transaction, this Mastercard thing is entirely onchain.

>>60563339
We got one confirmed fuddie location

>>60563557
Jp morgan (eth/base) and walmart (vechain) is a great example because its confirmed that walmart china partnered with them. Your main argument relies on the assumption that both chains natively support the same time hash function and time-lock mechanisms. Vechain's proof of authority contrasts with base's rollup design, making direct atomic swaps technically complex and risky without a shared protocol.

Both examples have trade offs between your complex but feasible approach versus CCIPs ease of use functionality. Otherwise they would persue atomic swaps rather than what mastercard and chainlink formed.

Atomic swaps = quick and more defined
CCIP = ease of use and standardizes protocols

But regardless both are viable options depending on what the enterprise requires.

>>60563262 (OP)
In true Chainlink fashion this "product" is really Chainlink x Mastercard v0.1, i.e. almost completely useless and not much more than a proof of concept

>>60563642
Check the network fee (ccip)

Onramp fee is mastercard's and platform fee is swapper's

>>60563278
Same fees as Coinbase. For even bigger amounts I'm assuming it's cheaper.

>>60563262 (OP)
Its over i sold

>third party uses chainlink services
>third party charges high fees
>"wtf how could chainlink do this?!?"

reminds me of those early "defi project that used chainlink got hacked" fud posts