Chainlink's official blog explains its blockchain oracle network, verifiable randomness, threshold signatures and DeFi smart contract uses.
HN links it in Chainlink hiring posts and in oracle debates, where commenters cite its verifiable random function as a sensible oracle use case.
Literally none of this is true:
> Needing to rely on trust is a big problem that Bitcoin solves.
No, it doesn't. As soon as anything is external to the Bitcoin network, you now require trust. This is so well-known it has a name: the oracle problem [1]. Crypto Andys, of course, just double-down and say we need more crypto. Just like libertarians who when confronted with the problems of lack of regulation they will argue the solution is even less regulation.
> There's no single Bitcoin Chair than can tweak the policy or supply of Bitcoin that you have to trust.
Instead there's unaccountable miners who with 51% of the hash power can completely rewrite the rules with no recourse. Bitcoin has already forked multiple times [2].
> There are no charge backs
Chargebacks are a feature not a bug.
> no middle men that you you have to trust to not steal your money in transit
FTX customers may disagree.
[1]: https://blog.chain.link/what-is-the-blockchain-oracle-problem/
[2]: https://www.cnbctv18.com/cryptocurrency/a-list-of-bitcoin-forks-and-how-they-have-changed-the-network-13318902.htm
> This paragraph perfectly encapsulates everything wrong with the way promoters sell Ethereum... That information comes from "oracles", or what the article calls "validators".
Validators and Oracles are two different things entirely. That factual error aside, this is like saying that the US Federal Reserve is a weak system because Lehman Brothers and the MBS market failed.
Regardless, The Oracle Problem is already incredibly obvious and well-documented[0][1][2][3].
[0] - https://blog.chain.link/what-is-the-blockchain-oracle-problem/
[1] - https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/2959
[2] - https://cointelegraph.com/magazine/2021/12/30/can-blockchain-solve-its-oracle-problem
[3] - https://www.proquest.com/docview/2524524192
Chainlink | Frontend, Backend, Cryptography & Security Engineering | Full Time | Remote (Currently US/UK.)
Chainlink is building the infrastructure for trustworthy real-world data on Ethereum and other blockchains, to enable smart contracts which encourage and respond to real-world outcomes.
We're mostly using golang on the backend, typescript on the frontend. Check out our code at https://github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink/ and our blog at https://blog.chain.link/ . We're looking for capable, self-reliant engineers who are interested in helping us revolutionize collaboration and mutual aid through transparent, self-executing contracts. If that's you, please reach out to us at careers@chain.link.
the future of NFTs will probably involve a shift from NFTs as collectible novelties to NFTs linked to offchain events, data and payments, combining the advantages of both decentralized and traditional worlds.
https://blog.chain.link/create-dynamic-nfts-using-chainlink-oracles/
if you don't like chainlink then you can substitute any other blockchain oracle network and the article still makes sense.
> there's a 20% chance that it came from A_1, 20% chance it came from A_2, ...
You can't do this[1], as the blockchain does its best to be perfectly deterministic. Best you can do is get an oracle to get you a random seed (which you'll see publicly in the oracle token), so you'll know exactly "what went where."
[1] https://blog.chain.link/random-number-generation-solidity/
An oracle is a totally sensible approach for certain use cases, see the VRF support in chain link as an example:
https://blog.chain.link/verifiable-random-function-vrf/