Thread 60896100

>Cardano founder comes out and says without Chainlink they are going to die. Retail? Buys more Cardano.
>SWIFT CIO comes out and says XRP is useless and that Chainlink is the way banks are going to onboard to blockchain. Retail? Buys XRP.
>WLFI new "hot moonshot" launches and immediately the first thing they do is latch themselves onto Chainlink because they know it's their only chance at competing/surviving. Retail? Buys WLFI

This list basically goes on forever. Is it not entirely the strangest thing that you've ever seen that people continue to buy anything but Chainlink despite the fact that everything in blockchain has become completely dependent on it?

>>60896100 (OP)
yeah that's good for chainlink labs but how does it help you (you're down 55% from last cycle)

>>60896100 (OP)
>>60896111
You don't see digits like this unless it's face-melting gigamoon time.

>>60896120
All I see is the digits of my networth going down.

>>60896100 (OP)
After 2017, everyone picked the hill (coin) they will live and die on.

>>60896126
lol

>>60896100 (OP)
One thing no one has priced in yet is a coordinated news cycle across legacy, new, and crypto media.

Headlines
SWIFT partners with Chainlink to bring 30T in tokenized assets on-chain

The Future of Finance is Here

Chainlink: The institutional Bitcoin?

The Tokenization Revolution and the Company Driving It

The Next Era of Finance is Here

Theres unironically a spell active that makes LINK invisible to normies atm

>>60896195
saturnian magic, if you will

we fudded too hard boys
now it can never moon

>>60896195
which is weird because 5-6 years ago ALL my normies friends wouldn't shut up about chainlink
I bought a bag and still hold it but I don't have any faith in it

>>60896285
watch the french interview and the nyse interview with ser ghey
there's a 50% chance this thing goes 100x from here

>>60896285
What normies havent even heard of LINK

They were all in NFTs and shit 5 years ago

>>60896295
yeah I hope so
I didn't like the whitepaper 2.0
it sounded like cope
whatever though those hipster faggots didn't sell me a total loser as I bought at like $3 so it could always be worse

retail is not investing this run, everyone still thinks it's a scam since the be bold campaign where south park clowned on gullible buyers. not to mention the next admin will simply ban it again.

I’m convinced that it is some Saturn black magic that doesn’t let people without the eyes to see to buy Chainlink. Its like the Jedi mind trick shit

>>60896307
>I didn't like the whitepaper 2.0
didn't read
>it sounded like cope
may have
you have to measure it in real life adoption and positioning. as Senor Gay himself points out in the interviews, retail isn't going to take this much farther, maybe 2x. it lives or dies by institutional adoption. no it isn't here. yes it's waiting in the wings. if it flows in it's all going into chainlink. there is a reason charles is shitting his pants over non-integration, and there's a reason Senor is citing all these strange but necessary cross-chain applications the market keeps pulling out of them. is tradfi and crypto going to meld at some point? i mean it has to. that's the bull case. the bear case I guess is if cl somehow gets cut out...but based on how things are going...how is that even going to happen? genuinely interested to see an anon strawman this who's far enough along the track. sounds like link is going to own all the toll roads and network effects are going to make sure it's just them and a few others

>>60896285
This is bullshit. Look at any Chainlink YT video, a few k views at most. If all of your normie friends invested in Chainlink it's because you told them about it.

>>60896100 (OP)
chainlink doesnt pump thats why, you can thank fat man for that.

>>60896353
yeah we'll see
>>60896356
no I heard about it from them
but they were hipster normie faggots
sure they looked for "underground" music etc but it was all turbo normie behavior/culture
they follow all the normie trends/science/etc
for whatever reason they went with chainlink

>>60896100 (OP)
If the market were in any way normal or behaved rationally the West wouldn't be the absolute shit show that it currently is. The managerial and investor class is completely incompetent and has been for decades because there is zero penalty for failure. Banks lose their shirt? Government bails them out. CEO tanks company stocks and goes bankrupt? Get another CEO job in a bigger company because he has experience working as a CEO.
This doesn't prevent great companies from succeeding, but it does make it take a lot longer.

>>60896179
-11%

>>60896100 (OP)
He was saying without the current service of the company for price feeds. The token itself is not crucial and more and more are building their own oracle services even natively on L1.

Back in 2020 some anon said that link is great for swing trading. I wish I had taken his words seriously sooner.

>>60896100 (OP)
so.....invest where the money is, not what you believe? This isn't hard to do, just stop being emotionally attached to everything you do like a female. It's not your identity, and if you think that it is, then you have bigger problems. And they are not chainlink nor my problem.

>>60896666
Holy fucking checked. Quads of truth.

>>60896666
Further, their entire business scale is already priced in. The current token price cannot be justified by their current revenues. Their token over-inflated in the big pump and despite crashing like 60% since then sustained across 5 years is still very very over-valued what a rent seeking/toll token for price/data feeds can contribute. The network itself is a bloated corpse kept alive only and solely by actual fraud. SirGay continues to dump the comingled 2/3 float he lied about and gives crumbs to animate the undead corpse fo a network that cannot keep itself more than 20% afloat through revenues. Sirgay has been pilfering node rewards to build a business and cash in personally directly on the back of sales to you. The entire model is literally fraud. Not just specific sales at a specific time. The entire model is just outright and full on fraud and artificial growth on the back of bilking your savings.

>>60896100 (OP)
xrp holders hope the switch will flip and xrp replaces the entire banking system
in reality chainlink is how the banking system changes

>>60896996
/thread

>>60896996
>>60896985
thanks. i was worried with quads you might know something i don't about native l1 oracles but it's pretty clear from this what your knowledge level is.
it's true that if you value the business today on fundamentals it doesn't justify the price. the question is how do you value a well-capitalized startup with a market lead seizing a network effects business that's primed to have literal quadrillions moving through it.
probably 10x speculatively what it is now and eventually 100x on fundamentals if it makes good

>>60896996
(You)'d you cause i'm an idiot

>>60897114
the quads anon is the verbose xrp shill where everything comes down to: xrp good chainlink bad.
in other words you're better off ignoring him. he repeats these things like an autistic broken record

>>60897237
He also gets obsessed with certain words for days/weeks at a time. Lately it has been rentseeking and "muh comingled 2/3rds of the float" (don't mention XRP's float though he'll get upset).

>>60896100 (OP)
>SWIFT CIO
tellilng the xrp holders that banks are not going to use a payment system that competes with their own banking businesses

I saw this thread and considered buying some LINK but I did some independent research and found this somewhat worrying report:
https://blockonomi.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/The_Chainlink_Fraud_Exposed.pdf

Do you guys have anything to say about this? It looks pretty legit

>>60897443
Fucking JUSTing every XRPturd and they don't even realize it because they are sub-brain IQs. Meanwhile he is all in on LINK and the 90 gorillion cryptotards vying for his attention are still not buying.

>>60897443
Multichain nigger, do you read your own post?

>>60896100 (OP)
Retail is mostly prisoner of influencers and these are controlled by the dominant narratives from 2017

>Error: Our system thinks your post is spam. Please reformat and try again.
Luv that there's no list of spam words.

>>60897114
This just presupposes values, and that no one will build out competitive solutions once regulations are clear to. There is no justification to guess that at current marketcap, the underlying value build is bigger. They don't scale with payment size, they scale by transactions, which get aggregated and batched. Link is not like a settlement token, and as payments go is a MASSIVE friction it is stupid to assume will remain or grow given already sufficient totally rent-free software to phase out into. None of these presuppositions are likely or remotely rational to make. The price already pumped well beyond its revenue basis and it will not have a good reason to grow on fundamentals either through use or expectations of growth in use.
>>60897237
You are projecting because you can never argue a single point.

Where’s the best place to stake link? I’m buying 1000

>>60897931
https://staking.chain.link/

>>60896100 (OP)
It's the most absurd and bizarre thing to witness and I can't make any sense other than >>60896195
>>60896337

Ok but....... price?? Oh..... and chart??

>>60897921
you put together a good argument
> This just presupposes values, and that no one will build out competitive solutions once regulations are clear to.
What competitive solutions? If you build a simple on-ramp for offchain data it's hackable. If you build a consensus network that provides trustworthy data it's cost-prohibitive to start. Pyth exists as a competitor there, probably others. The evidence coming in now suggests there are stronger unanticipated network effects than we originally believed, because of integrations, etc, other unforeseen details (chain proliferation, ...). So your options are build a hackable thing, or attempt to replicate a m0n0poly, du0p0ly... All those things suggest massive returns. If your suggestion is that it's easy to spin up a LINK clone I just don't see any evidence of that. It seems way harder than cloning X for instance, and no X clone has yet become a serious competitor.
>There is no justification to guess that at current marketcap, the underlying value build is bigger.
> They don't scale with payment size,
This remains to be seen. I didn't pry into the details of the Mastercard thing. Is LINK scaling with payment size already? Anyway, it's trivially easy once you are at scale to insist on a small percent, or to bundle yourself in as part of the guy who is taking a percent. Historically, if you are moving volume through your x, as a realtor, etc., you can take a slice even if it's a small slice. This phenomenon has been long observed. Exchanges scale with payment size, why isn't LINK going to be able to?
> they scale by transactions, which get aggregated and batched.
Even if it's per transaction, they still get to set the toll, and it will effectively act as a percent on the value moving through. Batched transactions is a red herring, in aggregate it's not feasible or sensible to batch for the purposes of avoiding fees, nor does it make sense in an evolving logic environment which has time T as a factor.

>>60897921
> Link is not like a settlement token
true
> and as payments go is a MASSIVE friction
if you mean technology-wise, that friction is trending toward zero already and may already be abstracted away even in these early forays
if you mean because they charge money, well that's the issue at hand, isn't it
> it is stupid to assume will remain or grow given already sufficient totally rent-free software to phase out into.
covered above. I don't think any such thing exists or can exist, unless you mean something that's definitely going to get hacked
> None of these presuppositions are likely or remotely rational to make. The price already pumped well beyond its revenue basis and it will not have a good reason to grow on fundamentals either through use or expectations of growth in use.
i do a lot of outside investments and these are the same sorts of estimates i use. Coinbase is an 80BB company, Interactive Brokers is a 30BB company. These are fairly fragmented markets. If Chainlink is a player in the distributed global financial market, where all of the assets have come on chain, it's pretty easy to see them adding 100BB in value, and more than possible they exceed 1T in value if they have m0n0polistic effects like Google, Microsoft, Apple, ... You could argue about how that affects tokenomics but my thesis is "it doesn't really matter" at that scale. Presumably they would continue to accept payment in their token because why wouldn't they? If the hypothesis is that LINK wires the global financial network into crypto, then all the assumptions are already in place for it to make sense for them to keep using their token to transact. Look at BNB for Christ's sake. Binance's token has a 100BB marketcap and what is it good for? LINK has a 15BB marketcap today and you're telling me that's not going to change?

>>60896100 (OP)
Chainlink is a 10-20 year investment. Be patient. Don't midwit yourself into neurosis. It will be one of the biggest companies in the world

>>60896100 (OP)
>everything in blockchain has become completely dependent on it
Because the token unironically not needed. This isn't rocket science.

>>60898117
>friction, such a thing existing,
CCIP has an in-built additive 5 minutes processing time and precludes micropayments or more efficient payment batching. ILP is a middleware which literally scales to trillions of tps (the hardware limit), allows micropayments, is decentralized with atomic settlement, fee-less (and allows underlying settlement fees (which are the implicit fees of whatever respective settlement networks are chosen) to be paid in any currency anyone wants with zero need to purchase or pay fees on purchasing a toll booth token which is what link is, and its funding architecture allows more efficient payment batching. CCIP even excluding settlement costs and times takes minutes and costs dollars or cents. ILP using a solid settlement ledger, takes 1-2 seconds for clearing and 3-5 seconds for settlement (non-additive, clearing and settlement run simultaneously, so full finality occurs 3 seconds max after clearing finalizes) and costs less than a penny and is hypothetically interoperable with any even potential traditional or blockchain network. Network effects in a decades old and ubiquitous architecture are strong but they do not last against this level of technological asymmetry and it certainly doesn't grow in face of it, and none of this even mentions the new trend of emerging L1 native oracles and competitors that will emerge in the oracle space as legislative clarity emerges and banks et al are incentivized to build in-house and developers are more secure to pursue it.
>muhnopolistic effects LOL
LMFAO So your argument is that speculation will dominate? Someone didn't live through the Dotcom bust. What happens is not Worldcoms keep Worldcoming and markets, especially banking sector focused markets, continue to float on speculation alone. Lol This is INSANE and your valuation thesis description is ABSURD. The froth and fraud and excesses get WASHED. The real businesses soak up the liquidity that is not destroyed and create new.

>>60898117
>>60898590
>Muhnopoly cont.
It is RETARDED to assume they will have monopoly, either from a niche perspective nor through a necessity perspective, when there are technically superior products that are just as secure which offer compounded trillions of aggregate advantage through use at scale, literally. Your idea that the token value (which is literally just a toll booth token that is totally not functional in any utilizable way beyond it and speculation for its own sake) will match other businesses with actual revenues is DELUSION. It is already WAY over-valued on the back of the previously mentioned froth and fraud that gets washed out. With the washout it (and the broad market) will be repriced). The current price of link is ABSURDLY high vs its actual fundamental value.

>>60898590
Wall of text showing that you don’t understand anything
Native L1 oracles tried and failed before - a new wave of retards think they can get it right now? LOL
You just know LINK is going to flip XRP and you can’t cope with that so you have to make up bullshit and hope people stop arguing because of the sheer volume of shit you spout

>>60898607
Native L1 oracles tried and succeeded on FLR. Even without blockchain, banks are incentivized and freed to build now that biz dev isn't relegated to silicon vc startups carving opportunity out of murky legality. Once it is legal, why would they pay others rent for a slower and more costly service? I just KNOW link is down 60+% from its ATH like 5 fucking years ago and it is still WAY overvalued. 94% of XRP wallets are in profit and /xsg/ average is uniformly below .50, putting us up 6x roughly since last December. You guys are down 30% vs. Pyth since the data feed announcement and down against XRP across the same timeline. Lol You can't reply to a single thing I say so you sophistically call it a "wall of text" because you are too retarded to know your own investment basis and how retarded it is and find it reasonable to suggest that a single paragraph of text is taxing beyond reason to expect to be read. Unbelievable desperation and weirdness.

>>60898615
"Even without blockchain" I mean "even outside the explicitly blockchain dev space."

>>60897921
>Link is not like a settlement token
That's a very good thing.
Because when you use XRP as a "settlement token", it has zero impact on the price of XRP.

>and as payments go is a MASSIVE friction
Massive friction is adding a "bridge currency" when you can just do atomic swaps via CCIP.

>>60897921
>The price already pumped well beyond its revenue basis
Chainlink has over 100M in annual onchain node revenue, XRPL has 500k.

Literally every word from your mouth is a much bigger attack on XRP than on Link.

>>60898713
>Price
Among other things, you are forgetting burns and reserves which at scale matter. ODL is demand-neutral per transaction due to the buy-sell cycle, but not entirely at scale. Market maker requirements, burns, reserves, and adoption create indirect demand, making it “mostly neutral” with deflationary and broad ecosystem-driven exceptions. Instead of driving demand for 33.11 million XRP ($100 million), ODL’s buy-sell cycle reduces net demand to ~993,377 XRP ($3 million) from market maker reserves. Burns (10 XRP = $30.20) and reserves (10,000 XRP = $30,200) persist but have limited immediate impact. Stink’s role (1,000 link = $23,920) remains unchanged-ODL doesn’t affect CCIP’s messaging needs. ODL’s design ensures XRP’s price is less responsive to payment volume, relying on long-term adoption and sentiment, whereas link's value stays capped by messaging, unaffected by ODL usage. And again, none of this even touches the broader picture of what comes from being a settlement layer. You don't see tokenization of assets or markets or NFTs etc. on link due to its messaging buildout, you do see that for successful liquidity buildout. And XRP has in-built messaging features, which once fully phase out the need for SWIFT or link in payments. As adoption sets in and becomes broad, SWIFT seems more and more like an unnecessary friction in payments and rather than pay rent for no reason, systems migrate to the least resistant, most capital preserving route. And they are incentivized to drive XRP price up for synergistic efficiency increases in payments, which may be why you see things like the crowned prince of Dubai launching his XRP treasury company etc. and would likely see much more in a mutually cooperative way. But at root, value scales for the settlement network with transactions and value, it does not with a toll booth data feed token like link.
>Friction
Doing atomic swaps through smart contract are implicitly and will always be implicitly

>>60898713
>>60898815
>Price cont.
slower and less efficient (more friction). This isn't even a matter of theory in the particular. CCIP objectively costs cents/dollars and takes minutes to settle even outside the settlement procedure-ILP using XRP takes 3-5 seconds for full finality and costs less than a cent and is micropayment capable with auto-bridging, pathfinding and a native dex and AMM. CCIP literally does not even come close, explicitly BECAUSE of the part of the process that involves link, insofar as it is used at all, hilariously.
>Revenue
XRPL is not proof of stake. Operators run with no profit incentive and do not collect fees from transactions. You literally don't know 101 to compare networks. Chainlink LITERALLY cannot sustain 1/5 of its operation through revenues and is held aloft by complete subsidization from CLL who are bilking link holders and pilfering the reward pool. You are so low IQ and ignorant on your own investment and deeply ironic in the way you accuse me of being which I am not it is kind of surreal.

>>60897114
>primed to have literal quadrillions moving through it
literal quadrillions do not exist you gullible simpleton
>but muh derivatives!11
this is what happens when you get all of your info from 4chan and Choinlank marketing slides

>>60898815
>>60898825
Do they have computers with internet access in padded rooms these days?

>>60896295
What french interview?

>>60896100 (OP)
You autists are projecting so hard. Normies have no idea what crypto is. To them, crypto is digital coins with cool logos that you buy to make profit. They have no idea wtf is a blockchain or that is has anything to do with cryptography. The more enlightened ones have a vague idea about how bitcoin works, and even then it's something about 'scarcity' or 'digital gold'.
Only autistics will go deep enough to try to understand boring but crucial tech like chainlink. You're basically in a small autistic bubble miles away from anything mainstream.
Until there are big news articles and a massive green candle, LINK won't get any attention.

>>60897931
https://staking.chain.link/

Official pool, don't bother with anything else. It's pretty much always full though.

>>60898862
When shift happens

>>60898615
If this is what success looks like, I don't want to see failure KEK https://defillama.com/chain/Flare?tvl=true
I can also cherry pick a few price points
Did you know, XRP is actually down from its 2018 high? imagine that, 7

>>60898975
7 years of no gains... and just look at pyth wow, only 86% down from ATH

>>60898950
Isnt kevin swiss?

>>60898590
>>60898615
>>60898825
Here is the thing though. You have to understand this. Now listen up.

Chainlink won. Get it? Do you understand? Chainlink won. This was a war and Chainlink simply won. No, seriously. This is very important. No, no, really. Listen to me. Chainlink won. Nobody uses XRP. Meanwhile Chainlink has secured $93B in total value secured. Proof? Here https://metrics.chain.link/

Nobody likes a sore loser. Nobody. And that is what Ripple Labs is. XRP lost. Ripple Labs will eventually kill it and have it join the grave of all the other dead shitcoins. And then Ripple Labs will jump on the Chainlink bandwagon too (they already did with RLUSD). That's not a prediction. That's a spoiler. I can see the future.

Chainlink and Chainlink Labs are the winners.

Sure, you can go on and continue to post about your schizo bag of XRP but no one uses it. It's a fact. If you hold crypto in 2025 and you still have any hopium for XRP, nobody will take you seriously.

That's how it is with Chainlink now. Chainlink won. It's that simple. It's really that fucking simple. Chainlink won the institutional/banker coin war.

>>60898590
>so full finality occurs 3 seconds max
how to tell me you dont understand the future at all, xrp might reach finality on xrp itself within 3 seconds but this metric is utterly meaningless
the future is multichain and mostly bespoke private chains for financial institutions: now the problem is one needs to conduct value/title transfer and messaging and compliance in getting an rwa from private bank chain A to private bank chain B
ripple cannot do this, like at all let alone in 3 seconds
bank from bank chain A needs to setup a buy system from somewhere and pool enough xrp in its own liquidity pool to ensure fast onboarding in a chain A to xrp swap and bank B has to do the same with xrp back to chain B
every individual chain now needs to build its own cex/ liquidity pool and warehouse otherwise useless assets for the full value transfer

then compare this to chainlink which natively does all of this on its own, doesnt require a bridging currency at all just a utility token that for a 10% surcharge isnt even required negating the banks from warehousing vast inert quantities of bridging currency on their books
chainlink abstracted away the entire need for a bridging currency, this is a just efficiency advancement for efficient capital deployment
and once again nobody, but actually nobody but us sees it for what it is
xrp is doa, so are many other projects yet it doesnt matter as price still goes up tho

>>60898590
>full finality occurs 3 seconds max
So? Finality on the private chains the banks use is the same or faster. And the banks (JP Morgan, Swift, ...) are interconnecting them via Chainlink.
You have no idea what you're talking about.

>>60898590
I have blowout stakes in both so I'm not biased here.
> the technology is better
Sorry, friend. Even if this were true (it doesn't seem so), technological edge almost never, ever, ever matters. Ethereum was complete 100% dog shit engineering. Doesn't matter. They can patch it. If their competitors come up with a feature they can clone it. Technology is replicable, devs are fungible. Simply does not matter. First mover matters, things like that. You are out of your element here, for sure.
> LMFAO So your argument is that speculation will dominate?
You seem confused here. I'm here to tell (You) about a potential 100x. What do you think that's going to look like a priori? Many on this board already know. You can sputter about it, the great thing is this board is anon so you can make up your mind in private. I hope you make it Ripple Text Wall anon because I love your spirit.
> Once it is legal, why would [banks] pay others rent for a slower and more costly service?
I'm guessing you worked in neither tech nor finance. Do you know what banks love love love to do? Outsource literally everything they possibly can. Firms are not going to look at this and decide they want to build oracles. If they want a slice of it they will do what they always do...buy it.
> Price news
I recommend not reading price news
>>60898815
> Among other things, you are forgetting ...
RTWA, you seem to have researched this very well, and that's admirable. The problem is you simply do not have the experience or understanding. You are like a well-read intern showing up in D.C. thinking that qualifies him to be president. If you really cannot evaluate how your arguments are doing, you are stuck in the middle of the curve, and you do not have the capacity to make it.

>>60899285
I have no idea, accent sounds french

>>60896337
Probably right. I'm pretty new to biz to be fair, but I never heard of link til this year despite being on /x/ for a while now and living on the Internet for 20 years.

>>60897471
>Do you guys have anything to say about this? It looks pretty legit
Sure, the zeus capital report was BTFOD a trillion times when it came out, but here you go.

All the alternatives shown in the report are either DEAD, SUB 5% marketshare or LITERALLY switched to chainlink

I only really need to show this snippet from the report and compare it to what happened over JUST the last 3 MONTHS
>US Department of Commerce Collaborating with Chainlink
>ICE (Intercontinental Exchange, literally mother company of NYSE) collaborating with Chainlink
>JP Morgan DvP via Kinexys and Chainlink (CCIP did the actual work of crosschain transfers here)

>>60899971
Oh, and the behemoth coinbase oracle API mentioned?

LMFAO

>>60896195
Dont tell me this is the outcome of when we masturbated to that sigil an anon made to fully charge it with energy?

>>60896195
If so, why are you immune to it?

>>60899635
based

>>60900710
we are Saturnian by nature

>>60896111
THIS...so much THIS
link baggies BTFO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>60900689
We willed it into existence because of our reddit FUD campaign

>>60896179
there are literal blockchains that do what chainlink does, it's totally not needed, do I need to name those blockchains for you faggot

>>60896285
>>60896195
I think one reason may be that midwits and normalfag retards aren't really in crypto for the actual tech, they just buy whatever looks and sounds good and that usually translates into "whatever the new thing is". I think they often look at coins that have been around since last cycle+ as a waste of time with the exception of BTC/ETH/XRP/BNB/DOGE/ADA because it's what everyone's been shilling for the past nearly a decade

They probably just don't understand it, or they understand what's being said but think it's too good to be true

>>60899884
Literally nothing you said is responsive to anything I did and as usual all of it is "actually, you just don't understand" cope. You literally just skirted every single thing and said shit like "well, you are a well read intern and a priori." Most of which don't even make sense. You did the same thing to construct your hypothetical 100x thesis which can LITERALLY be plug and played with any other project because you did nothing to justify it other than appeal to successful companies and conclude therefore CLL must be that successful also and therefore link will be also. Unbelievably stupid, a priori. Lol There is ZERO percent chance banks choose the option that is 100x slower and more expensive in their core business. If they do, they can literally be outperformed by community banks offering the same service and will lose a huge amount of business to them. So they either join or lose, forced by technological edge. How many horse drawn cross country courier services do you see operating?

>>60896111
This is what token holders don’t understand. The chainlink token doesn’t expose itself to the entirety of chainlink labs economy, it only exposes them to revenue generated by CCIP as chainlink is the universal gas token.

>>60897114
If the economics of chainlink does not benefit token holders then token will remain low. Only chainlink labs is winning. Chainlink coin is only for gas of ccip which only has revenue of like $200-$1,000 a day

>>60901586
nope it's driven only by speculation not gas if that was the case eth's price would be astronomical

>>60899635
Never said the future wasn't multichain. I specifically mentioned how ILP is built to be interoperable across any even hypothetical traditional or blockchain network, serving as a tcp/ip-esque value layer for the internet. The XRPL has protocol level messaging and capacity for minted assets and an EVM. Even outside payments (which we are expliclity talking about), this is not true. The Land Department of Dubai literally just announced they are tokenizing land on the XRPL. Major developers in Japan are doing same with real estate. They are being tokenized on public XRPL presently. Banks don't need to warehouse XRP, you literally don't understand the core process of ODL or how XRP is sourced, though they are incentivized to drive its price up because the higher its price is and more depth it gets, the more efficient the XRPL becomes, which may be why so many treasury strategies are launching. ILP abstracts away the entire ledger silos with connectors, streaming payments, and two-phase commits for trustless interoperability, this blows CLL OUT in terms of efficiency for capital deployment btwn any chains. Chainlink for payments is like injecting steroids into a horse to turbo-charge your carriage-you still lose to semis and trains. Lol Unlike Chainlink’s CCIP, which relies on link and complex oracle integrations with ongoing fees and volatility risks, ILP is ledger-agnostic, using two-phase commits to ensure compliance and finality across disparate systems. Banks don’t need to build CEXs or manage liquidity pools; ILP connectors handle routing and settlement in real-time, often under 3 seconds. Chainlink’s abstraction introduces dependencies and costs, while ILP’s open protocol maximizes capital efficiency and scalability for multichain finance. This is literally THE thesis of XRP. You are hypocritical and wrong on every single thing and CLL will keep dumping on you to subsidize the whole network with the 2/3 of the float they lied about comingling.

>>60898975
They are literally launching fassets presently. This is a new product that is just beginning. Their tvl has absolutely jack shit to do with the functional success of their native oracles, which have been demonstrated successfully. You are literally all making the argument "Netscape and dial-up has a major early mover advantage therefore it will will forever." REALLY retarded thinking.
>>60898840
Non-argument cope.

>>60897237
was right
>>60901570
> You literally just skirted every single thing
yes
if I tell you a plane is going down, and you start telling me intricate details about the fabric the seatbelt is made out of, and the factory origins of the padded seat. you're just off-topic but you're convinced you have a smoking gun because you don't know any better
> You did the same thing to construct your hypothetical 100x thesis which can LITERALLY be plug and played with any other project
this is a legit criticism, and in theory we could continue to play prover-verifier where I show you why it applies in this case and not in others. unfortunately i don't think you can validate proofs. everything looks like gobbledygook to you. and some of this probably is contingent on a level of experiential knowledge which you don't seem to have.
i dunno dude. crypto guys on x will hold your hand and rhetoric you into shitcoins because they have something to gain from it. i don't need to do that

>>60896996
I 100% believe that the reason Chainlink is not mooning is because of Sergey. Imagine a normie and you see this fat fuck peddling some shitcoin in public and you're like nowayfag. This is evident with the oval office, Trump was visibly disgusted.

>>60901693
lol

>>60901719
lmao even

>>60901679
>was right
fucking atodaso

>>60901233
how so? what does that actually mean?

>>60902025
it means we are disciplined and see things as they really are

>>60899291
Chainlink labs won
Chainlink holders lose

>>60902062
and why is that "saturnian?"

>>60898942
Got a script? Some anon was saying it opens up multiple times a day but from my observation I’ve only seen it open once the past week (about 15 stinks), and by the time I got on my PC to stake from my wallet, it was already full. Please help frens

>>60902100
Imma be real with you chief. You're not getting in that pool unless Chainlink expands the max capacity. The pool has been open (for a few seconds) more than once in the past week so clearly you aren't very tech hip. Asking someone on here for a bot to get you into the pool is only going to get your wallet drained. You don't have many options other than to wait for the pool capacity to expand.

Oh and ignore the SDL/Linkpool shills that are sure to show up in this thread any minuite now.

>>60902096
this is getting into some occult shit that you aren’t ready for

>>60902142
Thanks. And yeah I’m not doing stlink or anything but the official. Hopefully they announce V1 in October/nov and it’s BARE minimum 100 million pool. Idk, this is my big bet, I’m 36 and trying to escape the Jewish matrix and just homestead and farm. It seems almost too obvious, but maybe we’re all just getting played and the value never is truly reflected in the price of the token. I’ve been right about some of my bets in the past, but I pull out after a 2x and then see it run more so that’s still fresh in my mind (I.e. uranium/quantum plays/nvidia). Anyway, best of luck fellas. This is for my children to escape the hell coming.
>t. 1700 stacklet

>>60901679
Nigger. You literally don't know 101 level information. I proved every single argument you or any others tried to affirmatively make, so you are trying to pivot from actual substance to just making arbitrarily applied/chosen high level metaphors that have zero relevance to the underlying circumstance you are describing. Randomly claiming with no connective tissue that link will grow because Chainlink will grow because Coinbase grew or saying it is moving seats on the titanic etc. are just corny avoidance techniques you funnel through a self-knowingly undeserved air of artificial confidence/erudition. You haven't made a single point, you have just meandered for fucking PARAGRAPHS saying nothing that you couldn't plug-n-play any other project into the argument of because it is COMPLETELY detached from foundational reality or substantial claims about the project itself. We never started "playing prover verifier." You just act like you think you're smart and therefore are smart somehow and think referencing terms like "proofs" or "a priori" in stilted, even irrational (particularly a priori) ways will somehow lend you the character of someone who understands argument the way boomers making facebook memes think putting their 2 day old shit cold take over a picture of Dr. House will. You LITERALLY don't understand your own project and lack the determined faculties to even begin to try to. COPE.

>>60901726
Why wasn't SirGay at the main table? Why did he post pictures with Brad and the highest level person in the admin he got was RFK at the VP dinner (where Brad and Stu both took pics with Vance at his dinner). Why was Sirgay not at the inauguration? Why were Ripple employees given as many tickets to the crypto ball completely discluding Brad and Sirgay was not?
>>60901719
Why did you clip the one second and disclude the extended prior ten seconds of him weedling his way up to the stage and standing around pretending he is preoccupied just trying to get onstage from the edge crowd for a photo op? Why cut the extended 10 seconds of extreme discomfort from Trump who never turned toward him for a second and kept talking to the others and literally swatted him away while Sirgay gesticulated desperately at him, with everyone around them both who were actually onstage during the signing looking at Sirgay incredulously and stunned by his naked self-interest and pathetic photo op vying? Meanwhile Brad didn't even attend because he had something even bigger going on and instead sent 3 Ripple employees, including Stu.

>>60902025
>>60902062
>>60902096
>>60902266
He is saying you are black cube worshipping satanists (saturnists). Look at Link's logo. He isn't wrong.

>>60902376
(isn't wrong about link and its sponsors, hopefully he is wrong about you)

>>60896100 (OP)
maybe it's an immune response to Chainlink being a globohomo shitcoin

>>60902376
I don't recall worshipping link.
He's associating seeing things as they are with being saturnian. I'm just kinda curious about what that means specifically.

>>60902487
those 'saturnian' qualities are derived from roman mythology and obscure occult teachings. there's also a connection between chainlink and saturn (check the archives). and holding chainlink for all these years has instilled a lot of those qualities in me. ignore that paragraph spamming schizo, he's one of the biggest losers on this board

>>60902487
I literally told you. He is saying it is saturnian black cube worship. This is an occult practice subset of satanism. It believes the square cube in meccah is a presentation of it on earth, as are the names Black Rock/Blackstone, mirrored around the concept of Saturn as energy center and transmitter and congregation of evil force and lost souls etc. From a tweet I weirdly saw recently by coincidence. Not saying I believe this explicitly, just giving detail:
Dr. Bergrun was manager of test planning and analysis for the Polaris Underwater Launch Missile System and evaluated satellite system applications. Also a director of Information Systems, he founded his own company in 1971 and is cited in “Who’s Who in the World” and other reference works. He was an alumnus of Ames Research Laboratory, NACA (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics), predecessor of Ames Research Center, NASA, where he worked for 12 years as a research scientist.

Dr. Norman Bergrun played a key role in the Voyager missions, the probes that were sent out to photograph Saturn, its rings, and its moons. There is a photo shown below from that mission, which he was able to obtain from the agency of a large unidentified flying object hovering just outside Saturn’s rings. It is huge, approximately the size of Earth, and is published in his book, “Ringmakers of Saturn.”

Dr. Bergrun claimed that these rings were not made of ice and rock as is commonly believed, but were actually the exhaust from these massive craft, which he calls "ringmakers." He asserted that these vehicles are proliferating and are now also present at Jupiter and Uranus, creating new rings on planets that previously had none.

Dr. Bergrun recounted his professional history, mentioning his work at Lockheed on the first generation of the Polaris underwater launch vehicle.

This had led him to work in a top-secret area behind closed doors, where he had been required to sign a 30-year non-disclosure agreement.

>>60902487
>>60902562
He explained that he eventually left this role due to "claustrophobia," clarifying that it was not a fear of small spaces but rather the mental strain of being confined to the same secret room day after day.

It was during this period that he received his first clue about unusual things in space after being given a set of data that no one else could make sense of. When he plotted it, he realized that it showed something strange.

He claimed that he faced significant opposition and cover-ups from official bodies such as NASA. He recounted a story about a source allegedly connected to NASA who asked him how he had found a particular image from the moon, remarking, "I thought we darkened that enough that you wouldn’t find it."

Dr. Bergrun also stated that his personal data and images, which he had stored in a supposedly impenetrable vault, were tampered with.

He claimed that unknown parties had “garbled” his files on laptops and disks, sometimes erasing them completely. Despite this interference, he believed he did not need the old data because he was so familiar with the subject that he could reconstruct his work at any time.

Dr. Bergrun said: “What I found out is, these things inhabit Saturn, that’s where I first discovered them, and they’re proliferating. You can find them around Uranus and Jupiter. Wherever you see some rings, that’s where I see the aircraft, I call them a ring maker. I say that it is electromagnetic because I can identify streamline patterns with respect to it that I knew were what we called ‘potential lines’ and that says it was electrical.”

In that book, Dr. Bergrun analyzed photographs of Saturn’s rings taken by the Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecraft in 1980 and 1981. He detailed his theory that the rings were formed by giant Electro-Magnetic Vehicles (EVMs), which are possibly being controlled by intelligent beings.

>>60902487
>>60902562
>>60902572
He stated that the 7000-mile-long elliptical ships are currently orbiting Saturn within the rings and emitting visible exhaust. Later, analysis by Bergrun and others suggested the same or similar ships are in orbit around the Sun, Jupiter and Uranus.

Regarding the purpose of these vehicles, Dr. Bergrun disagreed with the theory that they were mining the rings.

Instead, he suggested that they were “nursing” from the rings, using them as a source of energy to power themselves and to create new, smaller vehicles that later grew, much like living organisms.

He was open to the idea that they might also fly close to the sun to "get pumped up" with energy, since their apparent ability to withstand extreme heat made that possible.

He also touched on other topics, including his belief that humans were not capable of communicating with these entities, which rendered efforts by organizations like SETI ineffective.

Dr. Bergrun believed that the situation was becoming “critical” because the activity was increasing, as evidenced by the new rings appearing around Uranus and Jupiter.

His urgency was not necessarily from the idea that the craft were coming to Earth, but from his sense that there was a strong possibility they could, and that the public and the scientific community had to be made to understand that these objects were real.

He noted that his conclusions were too controversial for his professional organization to address. He distinguished between his work, which he said was based on data, and the "theories" of others, such as John Lear’s idea that Saturn was a portal into another dimension.

>>60902487
>>60902562
>>60902572
>>60902590

He confirmed that plasma had been scientifically measured in Saturn’s rings, which he saw as supporting his claims. When asked about the hexagonal shape seen at Saturn’s north pole, he acknowledged it but regarded it simply as another geometric form that these advanced entities were capable of creating, rather than holding a special symbolic meaning.

Finally, he revealed that he had spent ten years earning a law degree so that he could better understand the mindset of the people “running the country,” whom he felt often made decisions without comprehending the underlying science.

The argument he was making is that essentially by serving the fee-parasite of link, you are at minimum, passively feeding and bowing to the altar to saturnian worship the way ancient Romans did for greed etc. Again, not saying the Saturn theory is correct, just saying what is the case and sharing a tweet that I recently saw that I found interesting because I think conspiracy stuff is fun (and oftentimes at least peripherally fruitful).

https://youtu.be/wCUxEckYIZ8

>>60902512
I know more than you do about your own investment which you don't understand, and conspiracy stuff. Hilarious your understanding is limited to vague descriptions and appeals to check the archives but you still admit that participating in the normie greed cult you internalized satanic character, and still choose it. You are low information and simultaneously willfully corrupted for a token that is 60% down over the last like 5 years. Lol Even if the conspiracy thing is bullshit and you are just graduating into deeper satanic character through action and intention itself without Saturnian metaphysical substrate, which is likely the case..Genuinely asking: What could be more pathetic than choosing this (outside doing so in a deeply informed and diligently pursuant way)?

>>60902623
why on earth would I put time and effort into this place or arguing with you. fucking idiot, you can't be serious with this shit

>>60902643
That's the thing: You try and try and fail and then try cheap/shitty rhetoric strategies aimed at burying real analysis and subverting actual detail and fail at that and then you pretend you are not trying to argue to try to posture as too cool to engage to somehow make it seem like the only one between us that is willing to actually test claims is somehow cringe in a way that is more important to whether someone should invest alongside you than the inarguable material reality of the facts themselves. It is so disingenuous and pathetic and low IQ and as you said "saturnian" that it is tough to even compress description of into language. Ngmi in investments or in life lmao

>>60902663
thanks for the free psychoanalysis

>>60902686
Always.

>>60898815
no, as usual you're verbose but it's a very poor smokescreen for your stupidity
>muh xrp burns
xrpl burns drops, not xrp per tx, which comes out to something like 0.000001 xrp, nowhere near close, reserves are also locked nothingburger amounts
>muh odl
odl prefunded sender xrp wallets and connectivity before flows which basically just indicates inventory management rather than buy pressure
>muh xrp messaging
they have arbitrary memos on transactions, which isn't a substitute for iso 20022, swift's iso migration and gpi tracking framework remain the compliance default for banks
>c-chainlink is JUST messaging
ccip does messaging + token transfers and the fees are paid in link or native gas with network metrics showing actual adoption (something along the lines of $20tril+ tve and $70bil tvs
DTCC's smart NAV pilot also used chainlink to put mutual fund data on chain with major banks
saying that NFT's aren't on link isn't even relevant because it's infrastructure, not an L1
it helps with NFTs with proofs of VRF randomness across chains but otherwise trying to even raise that as a point is just another demonstration of your ignorance
>muh swift is unnecessary friction and will be replaced any day now
swift isn't a coin. ripple and it's products are not a replacement for swift. you don't even know what the fuck you're talking about "replacing"
meanwhile in reality SWIFT is going to be augmenting their network with chain interoperability for self-made bank cbdcs - XRP is actually needless friction in the big picture if you actually bother to look at what these parties are going to be doing
>muh crown prince
it was a private placement that a Saudi prince made into VivoPower, which has plans for an xrp treasury
>muh swaps kill friction
no, it doesn't erase legal requirements for KYC / AML data sharing, controls, or sanctions screening
global regs *require* originator or beneficiary data and structured messages, which is where the friction mostly is

>>60903830
good lord there's 22 other posts full of the ultracrepidarian nigger's retardation that i seriously cbf with
im pretty sure I've just fallen for ragebait anyway so have a second (you) >>60902686

>>60903837
I'm not that retard but see my first post about him itt: >>60897237

>>60896325
>the next admin
Didn’t you hear? Democracy is over and the hoes lost

>>60903830
>Burn
Drops are XRP's core denomination like sats are for BTC.
>ODL
Requires market maker liquidity fulfillment as demand scales. Try again.
>messaging
Ripple Payments on ILP is capable of ISO 20022 messaging. It is not a SWIFT specific messaging standard and GPI is late cope that is WAY too little WAY too late. Ripple are literally an INATBA founding member and member of the ISO 20022 Registration Management Group ((only crypto company) responsible for developing and overseeing the entire new financial messaging standard in the ISO 20022 messaging era). You literally don't know 101 details of your own argument or what ISO 20022 is.
>Chainlink messsaging
The data fees are charged in the toll booth token link to the extent link is used at all-settlement fees are not. The DTCC pilot did not use link to settle and trialed multiple private and public networks and none of them were link. Data/price fees don't scale with payment amounts, settlement fees do. And link is already WAY overpriced post-pump years ago despite still being down 60% from 4 years ago. Its entire network would crash if Sirgay didn't pay pittance from the comingled operator rewards CLL treasury 2.0 he lied about supply dynamics of and now dumps on you to float his business and pocket/make payroll
>friction
Never said SWIFT was a coin. I said CCIP was inherently a much larger friction in process because it objectively inarguably is. The component using the link token adds 5 minutes to the process and costs dollars/cents. ILP using XRP takes 3-5 seconds for finality and clears in 2 and costs fractions of a penny payable in any currency chosen with ILP adding zero fees and allowing micropayments. You aren't responding to what I said and are coping in a really low IQ way by arguing something else.
>crowned prince
So you completely agree with me? The Dubai Land Department is also using XRPL to tokenize land. Lol

>>60904069
This is good fud. I may sell

>>60904069
>I said CCIP was inherently a much larger friction in process because it objectively inarguably is.
I'm gonna agree with you here man but I feel you're misunderstanding that CCIP isn't doing only the transfer but the whole selling point of it is a lot of compliant extra information and computation that comes with it, and you can't cut that for the usecases they want to use and offer it for.

>>60904069
>verbose
You use this word over and over and over to cope with having no argument and feeling insecure and hoping you can veil competence beneath accusation. Really wanting something to be true and having no alternative recourse doesn't change objective reality. You are wrong on literally every point, in extremely embarrassing ways that show you don't understand the literal conceptual fundaments. Trying to say I am cringe for expressing this too granularly will never win the argument or change anyone's mind who isn't a retard, all of whom already are entrenched alongside you in the same carved out rut bleeding out in a war in your own collective unconscious hivemind clustering.
>swaps friction compliance
First actually valid critique. Permissioned pools/domains and the new creds amendment that just passed approval totally alleviate this. David Schwartz has said same and that these are the missing features which compliance officers and regulators would largely insist on for broad institutional use. This is not a defeating argument though, it is literally central strategy of devs and operators, and they are well in progress formalizing it and likely will be close by the time the market structure legislation is projected to pass the senate in November, which coincides exactly with the cutoff date for migration to the ISO 20022 messaging standard, which is required for any crypto settlement in tradfi payments, organizations themselves already being able to (for instance Western Union trialing XRP in payment corridors presently according to Capgemini's recent report). Lol This speaks to what I said about the temporal signficance of SWIFT and how it is not a bust, it is an asymmetric bleeding out. You either choose to play along or literally lose a substantial portion of your core international payments business to community banks (and large competitors/companies/PSPs) who choose to.

The linkie cries out in pain as he strikes you.

>>60903830
meant
>>60904088
as continuance of
>>60904069

>>60904086
I understand what CCIP does. I am making the argument wrt payments specifically, but the same is true for deed transfers, etc. wrt other middleware that can do the same thing natively MUCH faster and MUCH cheaper. Much of the data load CCIP brings is unnecessary, which is why I say SWIFT are a fax machine company who did too little too late and are hoping to the gated access stranglehold will persist just...because, but it won't, due to the nature of the disruptor technology breaking the gated access and being fully decentralized software with atomic settlement that anyone can use and structure process within any way they want. There may be use cases for CCIP's data load in the future of defi, but this really assumes a lot about the future of the oracle market. Recall that Facebook pursued Diem until Chokepoint made it unviable. Imagine the unlocked incentives for large corps and banks and startups once things open up. And whereas there is a big advantage to established payment rails and liquidity, it is hard to see how the legacy advantage link has is one that dominates, and it DEFINITELY will not dominate payments

>>60896100 (OP)
the thing is, and this will always be the reason why chainlink is a scam :

Sergey printed 1 billion tokens out of thin air and gave 650 million tokens to himself.

>>60904069
>CCIP was inherently a much larger friction
Literally the only friction CCIP has is from putting data onchain at various stages and waiting for finality.
ILP has less friction because it pretty much doesn't do anything onchain.

>Data/price fees don't scale with payment amounts, settlement fees do
LOL that's not what Ripple says. See pic

>>60904108
>the data load CCIP brings is unnecessary, which is why I say SWIFT are a fax machine company who did too little too late
What about JP Morgan, Visa, Mastercard, DTCC, the US department of commerce, SBI, ...?

>>60896100 (OP)
>god: you have to have at least 0.01 link to get into heaven
>link: -5%

>>60904088
>>60904069
>>60904108
This is how you're spending your Saturday.
Furiously spamming runon paragraphs to cope with the fact that the coin you built your entire life around is a userless ghostchain.

>>60904134
>frictions
DUDE. That is literally my point. CCIP takes 5 minutes minimum, not even including settlement and does not offer micropayments and forces payment in an asset they otherwise have ZERO use for as a toll booth token for gated access cross-chain unless they run enterprise nodes (probably subsidized by CLL). By metrics of both time and cost, CCIP is objectively and unchangeably a higher friction than ILP using XRP, even if it uses the most efficient settlement layers technically conceivable. And it offers capabilities they all want (micropayments, paying in any currency they desire (no requirement for holding or buying link for the pleasure of the increased time/cost frictions which also kill their velocity of business and along with fees cost literally trillions in missed aggregated opportunity)) and is interoperable across any even conceivable network anyone wants it to be, like a tcp/ip value layer for the internet.
>ODL
ODL is mechanically demand neutral but drives demand through market making at scale. Literally already addressed all of this. See the example in >>60898815. You are WAY behind times in your fud which was never valid and was always just weak low IQ parroting.
>what about
Not sure how you think this responds to what I said. I literally said SWIFT will not be a bust, it will bleed out. And the broader data business will be steeped in competition which partly will eat into fee commandments for access which will cut revenues for CLL which will virtually lose its payments business completely.

>>60904173
>runon
>furiously
>spamming
I am directly responding to arguments substantively and sufficiently. You are panickedly trying to characterize me being substantive as somehow cringe in a way that is more significant to the reality than the facts themselves because you are a desperate literal greed cultist who knows they are wrong and that their argument does not make sense but does not care and is just interested in using any port in a storm rhetoric to try to maneuver discourse around the facts you don't understand your own investment and the facts themselves which despite you not having a command over, you tacitly admit to yourself are true at a level conscious enough to convert you into these sorts of rhetorical strategies. I am happy I am me and cannot imagine the hell of being you.

>>60904173
Seriously, reflect on the fact you are appealing to grammar on here. You faggots always do the same things. "You post a lot." "You are (insert one of 4 fallacies you do not understand but use as an arbitrary literary device that you think accusation of translates to broad dismissal without consideration)." You are using improper grammar on 4chan!" Lol When is it EVER the case that the person willing to argue all of the details is wrong and the person telling people to definitely not read those facts because the person expressed them in a complete paragraph (which you find inordinately taxing because you are a cooked heteronomy enjoyer) is right and an honest broker? Why be like this? Become a real person again.

>>60904069
>>60904108
>>60904108
1/2
>burn
i know what drops are, but you don't seem to understand the math behind the burn rate at all - the fee is 10 drops per tx, which is absolutely trivial even at scale and will never drive any sort of price appreciation
>odl
odl doesn't require banks to warehouse xrp and routes with exchanges or market makers, it's quote driven and demand-neutral
even in ripple's own ODL documentation you don't even have to hold or transact in XRP to send payments
>iso and swift
so ill go slowly here, so that you can understand
ISO20022 is the standard, swift is the registration authority which is steering the CBPR migration
the coexistence period ends for this in november 2025, after which the payment instructions must be ISO20022 only
while this was put into motion, ripple joined the RGM as a DLT focused member - you do understand these two facts can coexist, right? ISO does not "replace swift" and xrp being a possible avenue does not magically give it some kind of monopoly in any capacity, especially considering the other designs in motion with CBDCs and CCIP
>ILP = 0 friction
no, ILP gives conditional settlement and stream payments, but the KYC / sanction aspects live are not on the protocol
>CCIP adds 5 minutes and tolls
as I said, CCIP fees can be paid in link or in native gas tokens, network fees can either be small fixed amounts or low percentages (which is the cost of having an actual trustless environment, and it's a pittance relative to the value provided)
but end to end latency is dominated by the source / destination chain, it's not some arbitrary 5 minutes that you've pulled out of your ass

>>60904185
>>60904189
>>60904198
>if I spam enough retarded shit, maybe they'll give up arguing with me

>>60904210
See the "insert 1 of 4 fallacies" part of >>60904198. I literally predicted what you would do. Lol pic related is from a previous post to someone exactly like you. It might even be you. Learn informal reasoning.

>>60904189
The only substantive thing about your posts is the character count. Seriously, you always fail to address the actual points made and just deflect with paragraphs that don't really mean anything.

>>60904221
Again, reality is not editorialized by you. Even if you really really wish it were, the things I say remain engrained as is and no amount of pretending they don't exist will change the legitimacy or well formedness of content or get anyone who isn't a retard (already a link investor) to disregard it on your recommendation and style policing/failed freshman informal reasoning terminology alone. C-O-P-E

>>60904221
If I am wrong, name a single thing I didn't reply to, or admit you are projecting and being a faggy sophist.

>>60904219
>>60904227
>>60904230

srsly what the fuck is wrong with you?

>>60904232
see
>>60904230

Respond or cope privately

>>60904232
Also see:
>>60904189
>>60904198

>>60904233
>>60904235
Another instant double reply.
This is how you're choosing to live. Spamming 4chan on the weekend.

https://boards.4chan.org/b

>>60904207
2/2
>DTCC pilot
the smart NAV pilots completely validated CCIP's role as a data / messaging rail across multiple chains, IT'S NOT A PAYMENTS SETTLEMENT ASSET, it is a tamperproof, decentralized vehicle for data - again, you demonstrate a failure to actually understand the role that link or CCIP plays in any of this
>dubai stuff
they did actually launch a tokenizatio pilot with prypco after looking at it more, but it doesn't say which chain - im hoping for your sake it actually uses xrp, because that would be promising but it's not dispositive of xrp replacing swift + ccip
>xrp evm sidechain
yes the sidechain does help with their reach for smart contracts, but again this doesn't support your claims that CCIP + SWIFT are going to be replaced
if anything this is something that chainlink helps with - you've forgotten pretty quickly that ripple staff have officially announced their interest in using link as well
>credentials and permissioned pools vs compliance
xrp's vc feature explicitly requires the credentials amendment
this is something under governance, and still subject to regulatory ops, it's not just something you can hand-wave away
>western union
lol, you do know that when wu tested ripple they publicaly stated they saw no advantages to using it, right? there's no evidence that there's a followup for it either that I can see
provide an actual source or that's just another thing being pulled out of your ass

chainlink / ccip and swift is THE standardized messaging and cross-chain framework which is CURRENTLY BEING INTEGRATED - speed varies but these are all generally under 5 minutes - they're on a different layer, dealing with a different problem

the entire basis of your arguments completely ignores what chainlink / CCIP / swift are actually doing
i don't think cripple is entirely useless, but at best it will coexist with swift's interoperability framework and contribute where it can find a niche, not replace it

>>60904230
How delectably hilarious it is that you are so quick to throw the word "sophist" around when anyone can see that sophistry is your entire raison d'être. Not a single point taken in stride, not a single argument where you admit you may have misinterpreted or overlooked something. Just ignore it and spam one of the points that wasn't contested yet, only to post a complete non sequitur when someone does contest said point.

And the best part is that while you employ these slimy tactics, you cry foul and huff and puff about anons here not engaging with you seriously and how they always skirt around your substantive, well thought out, good faith arguments. Cruel world!

>>60904207
>burn
Agreed, burns are minimal. But whereas link fees are paid to operators, burns are deflationary to supply. Across potentially trillions of yearly transactions they absolutely could become significant but they are not a crucial part of the thesis and are clarified as a minimal one by sheer value by me in the example in >>60898815.
>ODL
You don't understand liquidity constraints or how market making works. ODL is processed through the exchange to mitigate exact direct token exchange. It is a demand neutral process FOR THE USER. As use scales at exchange, so must liquidity depth. You don't understand the mechanic of ODL, you are just parroting the court doc that mentioned it was demand neutral to the client with little/no holding risk, when considered as an offering of security vs. non in commercial exchange between the party and Ripple. This is not the same thing as it being demand neutral for market makers themselves as it scales as a service.
>iso/swift
ISO is a messaging standard. Many payment players have been migrating for years to it to synchronize an enriched payment standard, which includes optionality for crypto settlement. I never said ISO "replaced" SWIFT, you are literally lost in your own argument. I said that ISO was required for XRP to be usable broadly in payments without pre-established corridor bilateral agreements, possibly driven through payment service providers. I never once even vaguely hinted that ISO migration gave Ripple the edge, I said ILP and XRP technological advantage did, and that ISO is necessary for crypto payments to process at scale because the current messaging standard does not allow for them. Nothing you said here is remotely responsive to anything I did, smacks of you literally just learning what you wrote (and wording it weirdly/or in a dishonestly leading way) and skirting most of what I said and dressing the parts of it you address as a different argument than I used it making.

>>60904246
and for a third post,
if you want to make an actual argument for XRP dominance and "replacing swift" you're going to have to bring evidence of actual corridors using sustained ODL volume, with regulated counterparties actually using it in production, and bank controls live on XRP - not anecdotes, or things pulled out of your ass / straight up lies such as pretending that CCIP arbitrarily tacks on 5 minutes of extra transaction time

keep in mind that I'm not saying that the link network is fully mature and that CCIP is being used to it's fullest extent by any means - but it's undeniable at this point that it will be, by SWIFT and other major parties, and that you have completely failed to make a convincing argument for SWIFT being replaced by ripple or it's products at all
if anything you've shown that you don't actually know what layer CCIP even operates on, or the kind of role that SWIFT plays

maybe just lower your tone in these threads, or go back to your containment thread yeah?

>>60904207
>ILP
I said it adds no friction time/cost-wise. It doesn't. It actually eliminates it through payment channels and funding mechanic driven efficient micropayment batching, and making fees payable in any chosen currency. The KYC/sanction aspects are natively handleable on the XRPL, as already mentioned in the "swaps friction compliance" part of >>60904088. You keep avoiding everything I say and then returning to the same claims I already addressed multiple times and acting like I didn't address them. I think some of this is intentional but I am genuinely pretty sure you genuinely just don't understand the terminology and concepts well enough to even know you are doing this.
>CCIP
Wrong. 5 minutes is not the settlement time, it is the non-settlement time implicit to the platform. I have said this multiple times, for instance when I said how it would take 100s of times longer than XRP on ILP even if it used the fastest technically possible settlement structure, becaue the network itself is 100s of times more expensive and slower implicitly before you even consider settlement. Cutting into fees is literally one of my points. The network cannot even sustain 20% of itself currently on revenues and the token price is already blown out. Any competition cuts into their ability to set fee rate and again, the 10% discount for using the link token will never outperform ILP's feeless, micropayment capable network. And it can literally scale to the hardware limit of trillions of transactions per second using payment channels.
>>60904246
>DTCC
I fully understand link's role. You fail to understand my critique. Link's role in data feeds does not justify its use in payments, nor does it in deed or asset transfers. Maybe it has utility in price feeds but even that will be carved out as compliance departments are loosened up by regulation.

>>60904252
>Nothing you said here is remotely responsive to anything I did, smacks of you literally just learning what you wrote (and wording it weirdly/or in a dishonestly leading way) and skirting most of what I said and dressing the parts of it you address as a different argument than I used it making.
Except, it was, and now you're backpedalling
see
>>60904258

but we both know you'll come back to later threads and pretend this level of discussion never happened and that you didn't have to be dog-walked through basic points, and you have the nerve to call ME disingenuous

>>60904246
>Dubai
No, the Dubai Land Department literally announced they are tokenizing land on the XRPL. It is not a pilot it is an actual initiative with the first approved VASP in Dubai.
>EVM
Never said it did. I fully justified and made that argument based on other criteria like 3 separate times now.
>credentials
The credentials amendment already passed. I am not hand waving anything. The permissioned pools/dex is still in development, as is the new privacy amendment, which is why I qualified its likely timeline. It is a virtual certainty in the relative shortterm pending a Carrington Event that fully wipes the internet systems of the world.
>Western Union
Page 14, upper lefthand side:
https://www.capgemini.com/us-en/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/2025/08/Evolution-and-Impact-of-Stablecoins-in-Global-Markets-POV.pdf
Yes, just like SWIFT is resistant, so are other rent-seeking players who make their business on fees. And like SWIFT, like I said, they either see the writing on the wall or paint the wall themselves from the consequence of not. Seemingly Western Union is realizing legacy rails are out. JP Morgan said bitcoin was a scam at a public presser while they were privately buying it that same day. Not sure what you think this proves and I can certainly give multiple other examples. I just used Western Union arbitrarily because I read it recently. You keep saying stuff that everyone has known for years and thinking it means things it does not. CCIP for payments takes 5 min even if settlement takes 0 seconds. Some configurations may take 3 minutes, but none take 3-5 seconds, no matter what is used for settlement.

>>60904294
Once again spam flagged. You are a MASSIVE projection artist faggot-pic related is response. Being you must be Hell.

>>60904312
you keep getting BTFO in these threads yet you keep coming back
SWIFT payments can take several days - just moving the time down below an hour is a huge improvement. SWIFT is not going anywhere, it is too entrenched and trying to outright replace it would cost more than the efficiency gained.
XRP has no traction and no bank is using it for anything
LINK won XRP lost get it through your thick skull bye

>>60904344
You literally got owned thread after thread on EVERY SINGLE point and then tried to win by deflecting and then admitted you know you lost by doing Allinsky projection accusing me of what you do through mirrored language I used to describe you in the past, which is all anyone needs to know to know what you are about and that you know you are wrong. There is ZERO chance companies will choose to sacrifice the possibility for trillions of micropayment batched transactions per second for less than a penny because someone else they currently use can offer them something actually no exaggeration 100s of times slower and costlier which also requires them to hold an asset they have no use for other than as a toll booth token to use the by every objective metric inferior platform, collectively, as said, aggregating to trillions of lost cross-market/industry potential. XRP are already used by banks (though as discussed here, crypto in general for settlement largely is not yet due to compliance and lack of legislation, which is changing). They are also used by some of the largest payment service providers in the world, which Bob Way's whole thesis was that they would bridge them and as clarity emerged modify use into XRP as legislation permitted. Your entire argument, as said, is the fax machine company argument of "internet is a fad." Or "Netscape is too far ahead to win." Where is Netscape now? No transporter will use a horse drawn carriage once roads and tracks are built and it is legal to drive a semi and trains. It is literally fucking retarded to presume they will leave it on the table. And if they do, others won't, and they will join or have their business carved out.

>>60904370
Burying your opponent in drivel =/= winning arguments, chud.

>>60904381
I am not burying anyone in drivel. I am literally point by point substantively responding directly. He was the one who prompted multi-pronged response. It isn't my fault I understand it and he does not and pretends to not understand enough to know he is wrong sufficient to motivate him to dishonest rhetoric strategies to play pretend and cope

Going to work now. Enjoy replying and acting like I left and you were being honest and responsive in the rest of the thread.

>>60904312
>You keep saying stuff that everyone has known for years and thinking it means things it does not.
oh the irony

the capgemini pdf supports that concession as well as my previous points
this just outlines how regulated stablecoins and deposit tokens will actually be the default cash legs
it does also state that WU is giving XRP a trial again though, which is something I missed but hey, if it's trialling USDC as well as xrp settlements, there's a chance that could work out in your favor! but true to form you are pinning all your assumptions on this fantasy that this is a sign that SWIFT will be displaced rather than remain as the primary framework, with xrp having it's specific uses

it's kind of amazing that you've gone through this to the extent that you have, and that your conclusion is that SWIFT will be "looking at the writing on the wall or painting it themselves," while not realizing that this is based entirely on your pinned hopes that XRP is something that it simply isn't, and that SWIFT doesn't have very clearly outlined plans of its own, and that somehow these will be rejected in favor of a centralized ledger that doesn't fit their needs because COIN GO FAST

it's a magical and puerile way of thinking and i envy you for having that but you clearly don't work in the industry or understand just how ubiquitous SWIFT is when it comes to banks

>>60904423
dam, xrp investors have to work on a saturday. im selling all my xrp for link right now

>>60904423
>i'm going to work now
funny how you usually say that at completely different times of the day, specifically when being cornered in a thread

absolutely pathetic, but completely unsurprising

>>60904434
oh yeah on a saturday as well
those burgers won't flip themselves i guess lol

>>60904427
not just banks, swift is deeply entangled in the systems of nearly every government, company, non bank institution, etc. That means nearly every big ERP system used by these entities is integrated with SWIFT. Whether that’s SAP, PeopleSoft, Salesforce, Netsuite, and so forth.
Just for one company to move from SWIFT messaging to ripple (lol) it would be an expensive cross functional project that would likely take board approval and years.
And this doesn’t even get into the whole notion of SWIFT being a member owned cooperative where the banks have mutually agreed on an infrastructure they collectively use, and have babied and developed over the course of many decades while it continues to grow year over year despite whether people want to classify it as a fax machine. Yeah, they’re just going to willingly give all that up for…. Low fees and speed. Totally worth the cost and operational effort across literally every industry.

>>60904415
>I am literally point by point substantively responding directly.
We've been over this before. You think this is what you are doing, but it's actually just you plucking one of the 10 arguments you have in store and make it apply to the situation. You're ramming square pegs in round holes and then act like you substantively answered a point of discussion. Most of the time it doesn't even make any sense, like when you bring up the crowned prince of Dubai when someone asks you what kind of mechanisms Ripple has in place to accrue value to the XRP token.

does swift even matter? seemed irrelevant in 2017 when anons could not stop mentioning it. doesn't seem to have any impact on chainlink's business trajectory, outside of legitimacy and intros.
seems next to impossible that they will replace SWIFT for a Ripple solution*. Trump would have to lay into them and kingmake Ripple, which seems unlikely given the hands-off position of the US admin, SWIFT's stance on neutrality, and Ripple's failure to make inroads. Even assuming that happened, how much of a prize is it really?
seems like if they were going to replace legacy systems, the sensible thing to do would be to move federated versions of stablecoins from partner to partner, in the respective currency (USD, EUR). then you can incrementally migrate the whole system. chain is agnostic. *So I suppose RLUSD could be one of those possibilities, but XRP seems right out.
anyway, i've been ignoring SWIFT for 8 years. is there any point to digging in on it or following it? how is it going to play out?

At work now. Will respond as able:

>>60904440
>>60904446
>absolutely pathetic but completely unsurprising
>muh burger worker
Because I don't wage a consistent 9-5 at fucking McDonald's despite your continued adoption of the things I say to try to own me by saying "no u" in a way that is less about direct impact and more about knowing you lose so trying to use my own language and thinking no one will notice. Lol You are literally word for word parroting the exact terminology I have used in dozens of threads as a common form and now even in this one. I have a fluid meeting/client/billing schedule and work in an industry that usually requires work on Saturdays to accommodate mostly unscheduled/unstructured demand. XRP is up 6x since the end of last year with 94% of wallets in profit. Link is down 60% since 4-5 years ago and is still very over-valued. Not exactly sure what sort of own you are going for here.
>>60904427
>Swift plans of their own
I have explicitly said multiple times: GPI was too little too late. SWIFT are hoping their entrenched posturing and Chokepoint 2.0 would be enough because they know they can't compete technically-turns out they were wrong. XRP and ILP are both decentralized. Anyone can run a node or choose the consensus structure within the network. You aren't required to use UNLs. There is no counterparty. Satoshi said the same, and that "Ripple was interesting in that it is the only other project that does something with trust other than concentrating it on a centralized server." XRP scales at L1 with a protocol layer dex anyone can access. At scale, XRP is more decentralized than bitcoin which having been cucked completely from Satoshi's original anon p2p medium of exchange dream into the cult of late normies number go up store of value grift, literally requiring centralization into shitty L2s to be 1/50th as competitive as 20 other chains from a cost/speed perspective and being vulnerable to a 51% attack with

>>60904761
>>60904427
times of massive concentration, present massive concentration in corporatist ownership, the promise that across Pareto time it will sufficiently accrue just like it does in every natural system every single time, with Black Rock already messaging that supply "isn't necessarily fixed." You are just parroting terminology you heard elsewhere because you are like a chamber of echoes of crypto influencers and literally don't have any actual thought or capacity for it or even understand the tech you presume to talk about.
>Ubiquity
I have specifically mentioned this multiple times and used it in my argument as reasons for a taper and not a bust. You are retarded and evasive in a really faggoted way.
>>60904517
Literally ironically exactly what you are doing and know you are doing. I am replying to you directly. You are not answering a single thing I say, avoiding all argument, and then arbitrarily constructing analogies that you know don't apply to avoid specifics. In the mention of the crowned prince of Dubai's treasury strategy I LITERALLY gave a mechanical description of how step by step XRP's use in ODL translates to its increased value and how link comparatively does not. Here for anyone to see. You lying doesn't change what appears on the page written by me and your literal only hope is that you can encourage people to be so apathetic they take you at your words and don't just read, which no one will do because you are obviously being evasive and projecting. Anyone wanting to check, see: >>60898815. I have replied to every claim directly. They can't and don't reply to anything and then seethe and project and mirror terms I used in past threads to cope and aim for competence by assimilation. Literal NPC shit.

>>60904767
shut up verbo

>>60904427
Expansion on Western Union and broader bank talk. As mentioned, they are not the sole party. Lol Here are just a handful of others, which as mentioned in >>60904370 is exactly what Bob Way talked about-not partnering with single parties as the big value play but adoption through large payment service providers, which integrate and connect. Ripple has banking partners but they also partner with some of the largest thirdparty payment etc. players in the world, all but Thunes definitively already using XRP. Again, these are just a few of the 300+ examples. The incumbent network effect isn't so profound as it seems:

>Thunes
3 billion mobile wallet accounts worldwide via 120+ brands (M-Pesa, GCash, Alipay). Direct Global Network hooks into 7 billion+ mobile wallets and bank accounts combined, plus 15 billion cards, across 130+ countries and 80+ currencies with 320+ payment methods.
>Onafriq
40+ African markets connecting over 1 billion mobile money wallets and 500 million bank accounts, 180+ banks/MNOs/MTOs. 2,000+ cross-border corridors. Offer remittances, treasury services, card issuing, and merchant payouts for 300K+ merchants.
>Linklogis
China supply chain giant using XRPL to deploy its global platform on mainnet, tokenizing real world assets (invoices and receivables for real-time borderless trade etc.). 27 countries. Only 2.5% of their volume is cross-border presently, well positioned for growth. Partnered with Standard Chartered and BIS (tokenized ABS in Singapore's Project Guardian). Operates a trillion-dollar annual trade flow ecosystem in global supply chains serving exporters, importers, and banks.
>Tranglo
20+ countries (heavily in Asia-Pacific, Middle east and Africa). 2,500+ partners, 130+ mobile operators, 1,000+ banks/financial institutions, and 600,000+ cash pickup points. 70+ payment corridors, serving millions of end-users, from migrant workers sending remittances to businesses settling trade.

>>60904427
>>60904797
>SBI Remit
Over 1 million users operating across 40+ countries with a focus on Asia. Connects 200+ banks and payment providers.
>Bitso
Bitso, Latin America’s largest crypto exchange. Operates across Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and Colombia. Serves 8 million+ users and 400,000+ merchants. Handles 20% of Mexico’s remittance market already. 70+ payment corridors, connecting 200+ financial institutions and 1M+ mobile wallets
>>60904509
Moron. Ripple Payments is a parallel and complementary system. They don't need to abandon SWIFT all at once to use it. I literally argued multiple times they would not. They frankly could not yet with uncovered corridors. The overwhelming likelihood is adoption and gradual phase-out which is what I have said the whole time. As capacity builds out member banks will decide they don't wish to continue paying a premium for a slower and, business stifling, riskier platform. Just like the fax machine was used in every office and business in the early days of the internet and everyone said email was nothing. This is email for value. Where are fax machines now? You LITERALLY don’t understand how these systems work or even what argument I am making despite me being EXTREMELY explicit and stating it over and over after you guys deliberately or ineptly misconstrue it. You are making the same retard "entrenched network effect" argument your NPC counterparts back then did. Lol You all literally know your arguments and thesis are TRASH and inarguably wrong and that most (I don't think this of you specifically actually) of you are just doing gay rhetoric games to try to distract others from that fact. The only reason to do this is either being in a literal greed cult around a shitty investment thesis or being paid to post.

>>60904785
Cope with having no argument.

>>60904761
>>60904767
>>60904797
wait up - thought you were "going to work?"
or is trying to circle back around to stuff we've already covered and ignoring the reality I've outlined your "job"
and you provide no sources or proof of anything that *actually* supports your claims, just more fantasies and bullshit - the one document you did provide proved way more of my points than it did yours, which is pretty funny desu
thanks for confirming that you're definitely just here to try and waste people's time
>if you want to make an actual argument for XRP dominance and "replacing swift" you're going to have to bring evidence of actual corridors using sustained ODL volume, with regulated counterparties actually using it in production, and bank controls live on XRP - not anecdotes, or things pulled out of your ass / straight up lies such as pretending that CCIP arbitrarily tacks on 5 minutes of extra transaction time
you'll never actually address this, probably intentionally

>>60904812
>they don’t need to abandon SWIFT all at once to use it
right, they will need to integrate xrp with the intention of sunsetting SWIFT, which is a non starter for any risk averse big corporation
>business stifling, riskier platform
the known quantity mitigated by a global network of legal agreements, central bank oversight and decades of established procedures is far less risky than exposure to a volatile asset that lacks regulatory clarity and runs the risk of a private company controlling the underlying infrastructure.
>network effects don’t matter. Swift is like the fax machine
Terrible analogy. You’re comparing the shift from a physical, analog technology to a digital one, to a shift from a bank owned cooperative and legal-financial framework to a private company and speculative asset. You are arguing purely from a technological point of view while ignoring the legal, governance and trust infrastructure that was developed over the course of 50 years.
You think ripple has an ace up their sleeve when SWIFT are the deck, table, chairs, and dealer.

>>60904825
I am. Read the literal first part sentence in my first post back >>60904761. I literally just posted multiple current ODL users. Ripple market reports publish years of history of ODL volume. All of their sales from May 2020 onward have been to partners.

>>60896100 (OP)
>buys WLFI
My ROI on wlfi this week is higher than stinkies yearly

>>60904871
Spam flagged again (see pic related)

>>60904871
Just chiming in to say I really like your last sentence anon.

>>60904882
and yet no actual proof of these metrics to support this widespread colossal usage of xrp, which is what i actually asked for previously... not the aforementioned nothingburger inventory management stats

but we've reached this point before - your anger and projection obviously peaking after sitting in this thread since early Friday

when dealing with cripple paypigs I'm always right to assume that I'm just dealing with either a halfwit or a dishonest grifter employing circular logic, and then they have the audacity to get angry at me for using their own terminology to show how their maths don't work, or hell I can just ask basic questions or point out basic facts to get the same reaction...
i'm done here and you're well past done - you're meant to be "working" anyway, so don't let us distract you from your very fluid burger grill / fryer / cashier situation, i hope you don't fuck that up as much as you've fucked this up lol

>>60904940
the fuck is this
>>60904941
thanks anon

>>60904871
>Network effects
It is literally a perfect analogy. I am talking about a decades old payment system literally not much more sophisticated than a fax machine which is making a few updates that can't compete technically with a software that can be used parllel/in complement to it at only massive advantage and they run the decentralized software themselves. No need to buy a token they have no other use for to fund, no need to pay for/wait on 100x+ payment frictions. No need to sit stagnant in business between settlement. Micropayment capable. No counterparty. Etc. You are making analogies that have no actual root. Anyone can say anything-that doesn't make it valid. SWIFT are relied on for messaging. People cut out from them can still make payments by making phone calls. Lol Just because they are currently building out an objectively in every way inferior product for settlement doesn't mean they have existing experience in this and even if they did it would not matter. Your literal meaning entire argument is everyone does it now therefore they always will. Mine is they will continue to but other better software will seed into competition and be attractive on its own and will naturally be selected for just like always happens. If you take an animal and introduce speciation where one is just 1% more fit than the other, in nature and the generations of reproduction in a century there more fit one will be the present copy and the other will be driven into extinction. But here, instead of needing to wait for generations we are talking about software guided by greed and counterparty risk minimization and broader anti-SWIFT sanctions-esque drive for adoption and competition therefrom etc. Multiple Fednow service providers are already Ripple parners. Private XRPL is the basis for a key feature of the digital euro.

>>60904941
Glad you found it poetic. It literally means nothing.

cXQhsWBU

This is your brain on xrp, kids, don't fo it, not even once. Didn't even read the gibberish past the first two posts, kek.

>>60904871
ONDO are already using XRP. So is Archax for treasuries in the UK. The tokenization of digital bonds in the digital euro trial uses a private walled garden XRPL. Ripple are the only non-stablecoin company in the BIS' (UN typed organization, central bank of central banks) cross-border payments and interoperability taskforce and in the Basel Committee of Banking Supervisors' report 19 central banks (out of 45 members of the top of the top top down Basel policy setting banks specifically, not just member banks under Basel standards) announced purchasing a 10 billion dollar position in it, the IMF high level fintech working group, the Federal Reserve's payments steering committee, the standards body principally responsible for governing the web's protocol layer function, currently partnered with multiple central banks and governments minting currencies (Palau (uses the USD so a USD stablecoin trialed in an isolated micro-economy still large enough to be a solid test bed) already using it, Colombia, Montenegro (uses the Euro so a euro stablecoin trialed in a micro-economy still large enough to be a test bed), Bhutan (uses the Rupee like Montenegro/Palau (noticing a trend?)) with multiple NDAs on other existing project according to the VP who was in charge of central bank engagement, etc. For almost all of the above, Ripple are the only non-stablecoin specific public blockchain associated company. Stellar is sometimes there and Quant. Chainlink isn't once.

>>60905009
You are LITERALLY like redditors circlejerking about agreement over identity politics into each others' mouths.

>>60904956
What the fuck are you talking about? I literally listed you partners who claim to be partners using it. You can see the ODL flows on ledger. Seriously, what are you even asking for? This is such strange defiant cope I genuinely have no idea what you are even desperately lurching at suggesting here.

>>60904989
>anyone can say anything
oh, indeed
>Perfect analogy
financial networks are not a competition of features. they are a competition of utility and trust. the value isn’t derived from speed and cost, it is derived from the number of connected entities.
>FedNow and Digital Euro
lmao source me up. and no the 2023 pilot program doesn’t mean they’re officially being used. Primary sources only, none of that Gemini bullshit.
>>60905014
oh I get it now, you’re trying to bury me with bullshit and heavily distorted half truths. I’m not even going to bother reading all that unless you provide a primary source for every single claim you make
>>60904995
it’s objectively correct and there’s a big reason swift has not only never been disrupted but continues to grow every year

>>60905042
My analogies are fleshed out in description. Yours are arbitrary and could be said about anything and your only argument is "they use it now so they always will." The analogy doesn't follow from that. The analogy of moving deck chairs on the Titanic with GPI does though. Lol
>Trust
I guess it's good that ILP and XRP
are trustless and counterpartyless and completely decentralized then! Lol
>Fednow
"Gemini crap." Lol Here is a thread detailing many outright partnerships with primary sources given. Some are not partnerships-many are-others have second order connections etc.:
https://x.com/flrmoondotxyz/status/1888449409706578297
>Digital Euro
You are right in principle. I meant to say "sandbox" at the end. It isn't the 2023 trial though and is from a 2025 program. I just meant to show they are taking it seriously amid other mentions:
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/ecb.exploratoryworknewtechnologies202506_annex02.cs.pdf?93d7398bed92845d9685a9d6ee83fa66
I am pretty sure that you are right and that they were also included in a 2023 trial though.
>Half truths
Lol No. You are literally just not understanding arguments because you don't understand the basics of what you are talking about and are mischaracterizing what I say, replying to the mischaracterization in ways that usually even don't internally make sense and now weirdly saying I am doing it somehow?
>disrupted
The reason is that blockchain did not exist until recently. And interledger formed after blockchain. Swift has been a messaging consortium. Multiple people in Trump's admin say our payment systems are outdated. Trump literally just signed an executive order to "modernize them." Where is Netscape? Where are the covered wagons?

>>60905146
your analogy is meaningless because this isn’t a debate about technological requirements, it is a debate about membership, trust, and governance via shared infrastructure which you keep conveniently ignoring
>good thing they are trustless and counterpartyless
banks and corporations don’t need or care for a trustless system if there is no corresponding legal framework, central bank oversight, and a standardized system that can ensure legal finality and compliance. SWIFT has value through trusted governance. And every payment has a counterparty even if this is technically true of a public blockchain. Banks still need a system to ensure the recipient is solvent, compliant, and trustworthy.
>sources
really? A schizo twitter thread with a million links. get real.
>half truths
I’m not misunderstanding. I am saying you just made a ton of claims, so back them up (you can’t and won’t). Notice how the only primary source you could muster up contradicts what you said? Hilarious.
>netscape
Another shitty analogy

>>60905203
Your entire first part is just gush restatement of what you've said over and over that literally means nothing.
>Sources
It is collated member by member with primary sources and descriptions of the extent of partnership or degrees or separation. All that it takes to see is clicking the link. You clearly opened it and refuse to accept it despite knowing it is obviously demonstrated to be true.
>half truths
I have given detailed breakdowns about how ODL drives price at scale, examples of ODL users, A collated list of Fednow service providers by partner/non-partner/connected but non-partner status and primary sources
for every single one. I can post them here is you insist on being a faggot and denying their existence but it would save me a shit load or linking. You objectively know you are wrong. I invite anyone to click the twitter link in >>60905146 and see the truth. When is the person who promotes the evidence and insists it be inspected the avoidant one vs. the other which says nothing but meanders in business jargon claims which are sometimes literally unintelligible.
>analogy
Netscapepre-dotcom was THE network. We are in the late 90s equivalent of crypto. Claiming network effects existing now will win just because they exist is ABSURD and literally retarded. It is like claiming the USPS will deliver parcels eminently unchallenged, but even worse.

>>60905203
Since you insist on being a continuously dishonest liar and larping the link is not a collation. Here is the first. ACI Worldwide:
https://www.aciworldwide.com/aci-swift

>>60905203
>>60905245
Number 2 CGI:
https://www.cgi.com/en/Ripple-agreement-extends-CGI-payments-solutions-portfolio

>>60905245
Forgot pic related.

>>60905203
>>60905245
>>60905267
>>60905260
Number 3: DCI literally run an XRPL validator node:
https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2016/04/19/how-mit-is-using-ripple-to-push-blockchain-research-beyond-theory

>>60905235
>what businesses and banks demonstrably have required to transact with each other for decades is actually gush. only tech matters
gee sure thing boss
>half truths
your sources are shit and I’m not sifting through 10 pages worth of twitter moonboy bull shit even if there are some primary sources sprinkled in
>netscape
it was a browser that was replaced by a competitor. again, categorically different than a member owned banking cooperative with a 50 year history of dominance being replaced by some private company
>USPS
again, a bunch of companies that compete on the same service. Incomparable to a global member owned cooperative with a fifty year lead.
>ACI
>lists ripple as an example
doesn’t at all state that they or their clients are using them, just that they are listed as an example of a DLT solution (maybe they are being used but your source doesn’t say that ol chap). So really this is an extremely thin connection dressed up as proof.
>CGI
>2015 pilot. “Teaming agreement”. Didn’t CGI release a tech agnostic platform recently anyway?
>DCI
2016 article and DCI conducts research on a variety of chains (as far as I recall they run an eth node too for example)
Very lame sources. How do these prove xrp is being used by fednow?

>>60905278
quit shitting up 4chins with your methposting. if you want to post this shit go to x. saying this as someone with a ripple stake. you are not converting anyone here, you are just annoying everyone. on x you will get more followers, more views, and you will find an audience that will be receptive. you will never get respect here. on x you will do very well

>>60902372
>Why did you clip the one second and disclude the extended prior ten seconds of him weedling his way up to the stage and standing around pretending he is preoccupied just trying to get onstage from the edge crowd for a photo op?
that's total mischaracterization of what happened

>Chainlink founder comes out and says without swift they are going to die. Retail? Buys more chainlink
Really jogs my noggin

>>60905203
>>60905260
4.
https://ecsfin.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Enterprise-Message-Hub-v1.0..pdf

>>60905203
5. Need I go on? There are literally double digit more. Lol All sources directly in the link given. Why be such a faggot and act like this wasn't true?
https://www.finastra.com/press-media/ripple-bring-blockchain-technology-finastras-banking-customers

>>60905340
> Need I go on?
no. literally no. please stop

This is not a mature market.

Not having your network Chainlinked is a financial problem

>>60905328
>>60905340
>literal whos
>2019
>talking about Ripplenet which doesn't use XRP

Absolutely pathetic, never post this slop again.

>>60905301
>gush
It literally is. Your argument makes zero sense and wholly depends on crypto remaining legally unclear.
>sources
You asked for sources and I gave you a single link that literally gives documentation for every single relevant provider, saving me from copy pasting for 10 minutes for you to just click one. You doing so and then acting like it was not completely definitive makes you a HUGE faggot and shows how bad faith you are as demonstrated by >>60905245
>>60905260
>>60905267
>>60905278

>Netscape/USPS
You are acting like banks want to trust each other or benefit by doing so. Literally all of them do want a trustless system. Their cohesion isn't maintained by desire it is by desperation for alternative with complete lack of one. Now they have one. The analogies work because your core argument is network effect and if your argument is security and stranglehold it is retarded to argue they have more authority than the government over parcel delivery or less drive to innovate, particularly because they don't WANT to trust each other at all. The reason you are saying they are different makes the argument stronger.
>ACI
You don't understand what a SERVICE PROVIDER is. They are coded for Ripple use. Lol
>CGI
I love how you act like you have heard of them before. Yes. Tech AGNOSTIC. Literally my point. You are making the argument that Ripple will have a tough time in when the providers are broadening their systems in a way that implicitly includes them and others. You probably don't even know what Target2 is. It is literally so profound it has people falsely convinced in a deep flow of de-euroization in global settlement. You tried to make the argument that it is agnostic to minimize the fact it is plugged to work for Ripple and instead made my point about how open payment systems are becoming even beyond Ripple. Lol You are so butthurtedly determined against Ripple you didn't even realize how your own argument contradicts your core thesis.

This fucking thread lol.

>>60905366
I was being asked to prove the claim that Fednow service providers were partnered for Ripple use. They objectively are. Once more you faggots are acting like I am trying to prove something else to cope.
>>60905301
>>60905344
>DCI
I literally never said Fednow service providers were presently "using XRP" you fucking retard. I said they are Ripple partners, as in, joined together with them in press release to announce the facilitation of their product. Every single one of the examples is true and you acting like you knew a single one of them by name prior to this is probably the funniest thing from all of this. Literally every claim I made is true and, once again, like literally every time, you failed to even understand the extremely explicit claim made and held me accountable for proving another, surely to follow are accusations of how this is actually my fault. Lol

>>60905431
The graven face of desperation.

>>60905431
We're witnessing the death throes of the cripple cult.

Xerpies like to watch.

>>60904761
>im at work guys
>>60905404
>sits there making 21 posts over 3 hours
>>60904423
>after making 40+ posts here
The only thing I wonder about this guy is if he's such a bad liar because he doesn't care if it's believable, or if he's just too stupid to understand that people would notice this.
I'd guess the latter after skimming over his posts.

>>60905404
>>60905404
>depends on crypto remaining legally unclear
not really, in fact the opposite in that legal and regulatory clarity will favor incumbents and not disruptors, especially in a highly regulated industry like finance. and beyond that SWIFT = the banks and they’ve made their choice quite clear.
Beyond that banks don’t just want a “trustless system”, they want a highly trusted and regulated system with legal finality and a clear counterparty. You saying they are desperate for an alternative is a fairy tale.
>FedNow
Ok I misread, but then why even bring up that they are FedNow providers… who cares

>>60905477
I am at work. What's the problem with that? How long do you think it takes to type a paragraph? I didn't make 40 posts anywhere else? I probably posted like 5 other collective times in two other threads.
>>60905496
You literally described how they would not trust "centralalized ledgers" (which is TURBO-ironic) to refer to the XRPL, which itself BY FAR has the most established banking footprint and payment rails and compliance focused ledger for payments of literally any other public ledger. You don't understand what trustless and trusted mean in this context or are being obtuse. They want transactions with no funding lock, no required gate assets and minimal counterparty risk, not trusted counterparty risk. And so do non-west countries and institutions that explicitly don't want specifically western trust and would like to outperform it and is put in direct competition against it as well as against community banks who literally could outperform them in international remittances etc. using ILP and XRP. Bank Social comes to mind as a formative early mover with broad reach in this respect. SWIFT banks aren't just competing with Ripple, they are competing with foreign entities, community banks and payment companies and EACH OTHER. They are not interested in keeping each other afloat, they are interested in outperforming each other and if they can get transparency and guarantee onchain etc. they will absolutely prefer it. ILP offers secure infinitely scalable atomic settlement micropayments. Again, you are missing what permissioned pools/domains and private ledger walled gardens bring by way of function ane security and presuming security is trust in a network of competitors-it is the opposite. This is not a network effect that matters. Ripple are plugged in to the Fednow payments system, used by some of the largest third-party PSPs in the world and are building themselves to be the all in one crypto shop.

>>60905496
>>60905704
The more they establish liquidity and settlement on the XRPL the more everything else follows, every time. Ripple are building a whole suite of custody, broker dealer digital asset settlement, on-chain dollar denominated collateral, and applying for an OCC license and fed master account. You are seriously missing the big picture. And like Bob Way said this is all happening with them already massively plugged into those third parties and with the completion requirement if the ISO migration, this is the time banks tend to update systems because it is a big deal to do and it's better to make hay while the sun's shining. And when the ledger is clear for compliant use with the updated amendments and passed legislation, the system is optimized using it. Meanwhile the rails are established and all it takes is thirdparties to decide they want to "flip the switch" once safe to from a legal/KYC angle and make their core business using traditional Ripple software a lot more efficient in speed and cost.
>Fednow
You said Ripple would not be included, I showed they already are open for inclusion by the US domestic realtime payments. They don't need to establish relationships or hope for inclusion-they are very much already IN and as mentioned they are on the Federal Reserve's Faster Payments' Taskforce (only non-stablecoin crypto company associated with a specific public blockchain I believe). They have major partners at NACHA and TCH, etc. They have MASSIVE ground already laid and once it kicks into action, less performative players will not avoid them to preserve a legacy system which underserves them and gives their competitors a built-in advantage. I'm sorry this is just undeniable and anyone who would say otherwise has zero experience in finance.

>>60905704
Oh shut the fuck up and drop the act, retard. If you're at 'work', your 'job' is to sit on 4chan seething nonstop apparently. At least be honest about that much.

>>60905733
>25 pbtid
XRP literally in the death throes and Ripple doing anything to milk their cashcow before it is consigned to the history books. This is why they're paying this nugget. The absolute state of him. Garlicbreath getting sidelined and Swift saying it's a load of shite and still they're trying to keep a lid on it. Really, really pathetic.

>>60905787
it's 41+25 = 66 pbtid

>>60896100 (OP)
You know why its not mooning as it should? Because the fees are going to skyrocket when it does, and you will have the situation with ETH where you're just swapping a couple of bucks and the fees are astronomical.

>>60905820
The fees are denominated in USD, that has nothing to do with it. Its not mooning because nodes have no incentive to hold it and there isn't enough activity to incentivize 1.0 staking. DeFi is trash as much as people like to praise it as a novel concept, only tech savants and scammers use it right now. Liquidity is the real game, crypto at the moment is just a giant shell game, chainlink is trying to open up the small pond to the entire ocean, but until that actually happens the shell game continues and scammers will fight for liquidity to the last dollar.