run ⬡ the ⬡ juels

⬡ data spinner ⬡ silo disrepectoor ⬡ stakeholder in the backbone of the Global Financial System ⬡ p̵l̵a̵t̵f̵o̵r̵m̵ Protocol Economy explainoor ⬡

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

Since everyone is so concerned about Chainlink's fees - lets see where fees accrue in this example DTCC workflow -

> ethereum (but could be any chain) - whatever current gas fee is to lock token on mainnet (1 gwei is currently $.004 and scheduled to go lower)
> DTCC Besu Based AppChain - ZERO gas fees
> Chainlink - $.14 $LINK orchestration fee

Replicated across txs that exceed $20T daily.

There are a thousand public chains
There are hundreds of private chains
All locked in a gas race to zero

Abstracted and Orchestrated with the all the real-world's offchain systems and data by Chainlink.

There is only one $LINK.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

the token not needed meme is low IQ bait. The worlds institutions are not hoarding gas tokens just to use public blockchain. Chainlink nodes do not accept anything execpt $LINK for providing Chainlink services. All Chainlink workflows settle in $LINK.

Overcollateralization has to do with the terms of the lending agreement between counterparties - it has nothing to do with Chainlink. Moving value is just one step in orchestrating the Collateral Management process.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

https://t.co/l0ERikZHEt

[Zach Rynes | CLG @ChainLinkGod]

Even during the worst of blockchain network congestion yesterday ($7k+ tx fees at 8,000 gwei gas prices)

Chainlink nodes continue to publish oracle updates on-chain

And nobody bats an eye because this level of reliability is expected

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

what were Vitalik, Ari and Emin celebrating in the photo from Cornell IC3 below?

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

>institutions fund ethereum R&D during the scaling and battle-testing phase
>institutions like Swift, DTCC, JPMorgan, CITI, etc., etc., etc. are in production on their private EVM chains

you ever feel like youve been had? ethereum was always Chainlink's loss leader.

Its $LINK's turn.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

@malekanoms @TheStalwart 🙋‍♂️where would permissionless ethereum be without all those institutions funding the R&D that makes ethereum decentralized permissionless and most importantly - cryptographically secure?

https://t.co/8HDsx2v2de

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

@JTMDigital based and database pilled

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

I love how etherean utopians always talk about taking down institutions - while ignoring institutions funding the R&D that built $eth. And the current funding Sharplink and other institutions have committed to in place of the EF driving development.

and theyve always called $LINK'ies delusional

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

When the old world attempted Securitization - it failed with catastrophic consequences for the world due to the opaqueness of assets & systems & blind trust in brands.

Tokenization is Securitization 2.0 - with a Unified Golden Record - Powered by $LINK

https://t.co/PVdtjnJ1Uk

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

https://t.co/HiLWNCjH8d

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

everyone loves a good steve jobs style "two man team started in the back of a nail salon and took over the world on their terms" story.

Oh - wait...

$LINK

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

@malekanoms @TheStalwart 🙋‍♂️where would permissionless ethereum be without all those institutions funding the R&D that makes ethereum decentralized permissionless and most importantly - cryptographically secure?

https://t.co/8HDsx2v2de

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

@malekanoms @TheStalwart 🙋‍♂️where would permissionless ethereum be without all those institutions funding the R&D that makes ethereum decentralized permissionless and most importantly - cryptographically secure?

https://t.co/8HDsx2v2de

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

@malekanoms @TheStalwart 🙋‍♂️where would permissionless ethereum be without all those institutions funding the R&D that makes ethereum decentralized permissionless and most importantly - cryptographically secure?

https://t.co/8HDsx2v2de

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

I love how etherean utopians always talk about taking down institutions - while ignoring institutions funding the R&D that built $eth. And the current funding Sharplink and other institutions have committed to in place of the EF driving development.

and theyve always called $LINK'ies delusional

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

you expect others to punp your bags for you? people need to follow in the steps of the $BTC ogs and have some conviction that they are right - even if the world says theyre wrong.

you want $LINK price to punp? buy more LINK. tell your friends to buy LINK. as CT has reminded us for years - the best marketing in crypto is number go up. that only happens when more people buy than sell.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

you expect others to punp your bags for you? people need to follow in the steps of the $BTC ogs and have some conviction that they are right - even if the world says theyre wrong.

you want $LINK price to punp? buy more LINK. tell your friends to buy LINK. as CT has reminded us for years - the best marketing in crypto is number go up. that only happens when more people buy than sell.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

satoshi is rolling over on his beachside lounger

$LINK

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

I am once again reminding you that institutions have a different opinion on how they will use blockchain to make their systems - which already power the Global Financial System - more efficient, transparent and safe than the thots, VCs and ct rabble. Maybe you should listen to them.

They dont want immutable brypto currencies - they want synchronized trust.

$LINK - NDA not needed

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

what CT thnks institutions want - neutral currency + immutable tokens

what institutions really want - any form of value + immutable auditability

its this basic misunderstanding why CT still doesn't understand $LINK.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

rehashed pabulum from an incomplete understanding of what the real world has actually built.

whats that old saying? those that can - do. those that cant do - teach.

Everything. $LINK'ed. Whether they know it or not.

[Omid Malekan @malekanoms]

I fear @TheStalwart is falling into the trap a lot of crypto pros have over the years, which is to swing from one extreme view to the other based on "what's exciting in crypto today."

The problem with the "blockchain, not Bitcoin" narrative is not that it violates some naive maxi view of Bitcoin being the only viable application of blockchain tech, it's that it ignores the reality that the only safe and useful blockchain (for any application) is one secured by a protocol-issued & censorship-resistant native coin.

If you read the Bitcoin white paper, it's clear that Satoshi didn't create the components we collectively call blockchain to enable a digital hard currency. He was trying to invent a peer-to-peer payment system, and realized the only way to secure it was to give it a native coin.

(The paper is surprisingly non-ideological and talks a lot more about the flaws of intermediated payment & settlement than it does inflation or fiat money).

The first application of P2P and censorship-resistant settlement was Bitcoin. Then came Ethereum which abstracted the service to any asset (tokens) and made them programmable (smart contracts).

But you still need ETH (or SOL or HYPE or whichever native coin) to make P2P settlement of stablecoins, tokenized securities, perps, and any other asset, along with their smart contracts, secure while decentralized.

The "blockchain, not Bitcoin" approach originally decided to do away with the coin, which also meant it had to do away with permissionless consensus, and as a consequence, the pure P2P settlement and censorship resistance.

This was Corda, Fabric, Quorom, DAML etc etc. Billions of dollars got plowed into them, lots of hype was generated, but it all failed.

Why? First, permissioned networks have none of the end-user protections of a decentralized system. Their use of consensus and cryptography is mostly performative. The gatekeeper that rules who is allowed to validate is all powerful: it can shut down the network, censor specific users, or reverse settlement. It can be forced by a government to do this. It can also be hacked.

Second, even if such a network succeeds, it becomes a monopoly, and the gatekeeper now has total control over pricing and access, which it will monetize, because that's what happened with card networks, exchanges, and clearinghouses.

They all began with the same egalitarian goals of permissioned networks. Many were none profits or mutually owned at the start. Today, they are more valuable than the companies that founded them.

The latest wave of enterprise networks pretending to be blockchains (Canton, Tempo, Ark, likely many more to come) are just rerunning the same playbook. Some have a coin, but its existence is more about monetization and signaling than utility. It has nothing to do with consensus (since that's permissioned) so it doesn't enable P2P activity. Access is controlled by the whitelisted validators, who are controlled by the gatekeeper.

The other problem with such a coin is that it has no supply guarantees. Bitcoin's 21m hard cap only works because it's set by the protocol and nobody has the power to unilaterally change that (possibly to a fault - see quantum threat). In a permissioned network the gatekeeper can order the supply increased tomorrow and it'll go up, guaranateed.

The purveyors of these networks, some of whom own billions of $$ of its dubious coin, act like their systems offer tokenization and smart contracts, too.

But they don't. They are just databases with a button, so they can offer asset and code - same as any other clearinghouse with a ledger and APIs. Every enterprise network is just an unregulated clearinghouse, with all the counterparty risk and vendor lock-in of any clearinghouse, but without regulatory protection.

Going back to Joe's original point, what makes stablecoins, tokenized assets, and non-custodial perps on real blockchains interesting is the way they can flow freely, from anyone to anyone else, sans interferences.

This isn't about decentralization ideology, it's about diminished counterparty risk, guaranteed settlement, and knowing that should your solution succeed, you won't get a knock on the door from the gatekeeper saying "nice business you got there on top of my network, I'm afraid it's going to cost you $100m a year to keep running it. You know, because maintenance costs."

I'm sure that will happen because it has already happened on every privately owned social media platform, payment system, and clearinghouse.

But if you issue stablecoins on Ethereum, or build a useful application on Solana, or build a perps market on top of (a future) Hyperliquid (when it's more decentralized) then you'll never get that knock, because nobody has the power to give it.

This is only possible on a permissionless system empowered by a native coin - Blockchain, and Bitcoin.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

@malekanoms @TheStalwart and you can call us "suit simps" all you want mr adjunct college professor. we're just trying to explain to everyone what is actually happening.

not thrashing about because people are choosing to do things in a way we dont agree with.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

you must like pounding sand. because none of what you and the thot class are saying changes whats already been built and going into production.

You keep talking about trust. But you stll havent done the work to see how their chains work to solve trust using the Chainlink abstraction and orchestration layer.

https://t.co/b7VWjKWpVf

[Chainlink @chainlink]

DTCC’S NADINE CHAKAR & SERGEY NAZAROV AT SIBOS 2026

Nadine Chakar, Managing Director & Global Head of @The_DTCC Digital Assets, joined @SergeyNazarov to discuss what it takes to bring tokenization to market scale.

As Nadine put it: “We shouldn’t care which rail it’s on, what type of asset it is; we should care that it’s interoperable, it’s compliance-aware, & that it’s operating 24/7 anywhere that a client needs to manage risk.”

On tokenized equity, Sergey added: “This AppChain and the tokenization of equity in this reliable institutional-grade form will accelerate the use of tokenized stock.”

Watch the full conversation ↓

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

you must like pounding sand. because none of what you and the thot class are saying changes whats already been built and going into production.

You keep talking about trust. But you stll havent done the work to see how their chains work to solve trust using the Chainlink abstraction and orchestration layer.

https://t.co/b7VWjKWpVf

[Sergey Nazarov @SergeyNazarov]

Very excited about the Link:NYC conference next week in New York. Excited to be bringing together the top TradFi and DeFi teams and their senior leaders to discuss the future of the new global financial system.

https://t.co/G8Sp2iLK8U

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

@DrakeLinked @Shadzrick bro - you didn't hear? they dont need to. institutions failed at their first iteration attempts at enterprise blockchain like 10 years ago. and theyve just been sitting around doing nothing all this time and were just going to cede the keys to the kingdom to public blockchain.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

who told you the worlds largest and most regulated institutions would care about pumping anyone's bags? theyre interested in reduced friction, lower costs and improved efficiencies. they arent VCs or crypto twitter shills.

crypto is *still* an unregulated highly speculative asset class. as speculators - our job is too speculate on where the puck is going and be there before the masses.

Swift is a member owned co-op. DTCC is a member owned shared market utility. You cant buy Swift stock. You cant buy DTCC stock.

But you can buy $LINK - the token that powers the Global Financial Systems move to blockchain.

[run ⬡ the ⬡ juels @nullpackets]

who told you the worlds largest and most regulated institutions would care about pumping anyone's bags? theyre interested in reduced friction, lower costs and improved efficiencies. they arent VCs or crypto twitter shills.

crypto is *still* an unregulated highly speculative asset class. as speculators - our job is too speculate on where the puck is going and be there before the masses.

Swift is a member owned co-op. DTCC is a member owned shared market utility. You cant buy Swift stock. You cant buy DTCC stock.

But you can buy $LINK - the token that powers the Global Financial Systems move to blockchain.

[Digital Asset Summit 2026 @blockworksDAS]

"If I could buy stock in Swift, I would... We can actually go extend into new settlement locations like public and private blockchains."

@TomZschach @swiftcommunity

[Mike Selig @ChairmanSelig]

For too long, the @CFTC and @SECGov were locked in regulatory turf battles, unable to even agree on who regulates what.

Those days are over. @SECPaulSAtkins and I are turning the page on jurisdictional disputes and bringing long-overdue clarity to American markets. More on @Bankless: