Are settlement agreements always negotiated externally, ie. by word of mouth? Or are they written into the public ledger?
They are always external. We considered the idea of a flag or indication in the ledger, but there didn't seem to be much point.
Topic: After testing Ripple... - page 3. (Read 8658 times)
i dont see why not to 'ripple-trust' me 
Thanx
Just remember, if you extend $5 in trust to someone, they can wind up owing you $5. If you don't have a settlement agreement with them, that could mean that $5 you intended to be able to spend or cash out is now a worthless IOU. Trust in Ripple is a powerful thing. ThanxAre settlement agreements always negotiated externally, ie. by word of mouth? Or are they written into the public ledger?
Yeah that is a good point, the blockchain spam on BTC would get out of hand, even worse than Satoshi Dice. I imagined, maybe naively than the BTC would be used in the system maybe internally to the ripple blockchain, and when people make IOU's the spent BTC would be evenly distributed out to all the users (Is this what happens to XRP when spent for IOU transactions) But the important thing being all this transaction data would remain internal to the ripple blockchain until someone wanted to spend them outside of the ripple network.
People, including myself, have been looking for a way to move Bitcoins out of the block chain and into another system (such that it can be moved back) without a central authority that holds the key needed to spend the bitcoins. So far as I know, nobody has figured out any way to do that. If you could though, it would be great for Bitcoin and make possible all kinds of new applications. Unfortunately it looks like having 100 billion XRP that can be traded for other currency is a little devious, they say its anti spam, then they should have truly complemented BTC by using .00000001 BTC for anti spam (or .0000001 or .000001 ,etc...)
There's no good way to do this. Bitcoins could only be held on the Ripple system if someone were to gateway them, and there's no way to trust a particular gateway without having a central authority. Also, that would make Ripple's anti-spam system a Bitcoin spamming system as every Ripple transaction required a Bitcoin micro-transactions.Quote
I they really wanted to focus on trust based IOUs they could have easily used BTC to facilitate the transactions in small almost worthless denominations. But instead they create a stealth currency.
We honestly had no idea how to make that work for the reasons I describe above. Perhaps you could sketch out how your scheme would work.Quote
And a small handful own all the XRP? with current trades on various forums and sites making these people multi-millionaires already.
Billions of XRP will be given away shortly, as the system is ready to scale.Quote
I see no reason why someone could not build a ripple trust system on top of BTC.
I can give you a long list of reasons why that won't work. Maybe solutions could be found to each one of them, but I suspect that you don't see any reasons just because you haven't looked too closely at the problem. (But if you think you can make it work, by all means please work on it!)Yeah that is a good point, the blockchain spam on BTC would get out of hand, even worse than Satoshi Dice. I imagined, maybe naively than the BTC would be used in the system maybe internally to the ripple blockchain, and when people make IOU's the spent BTC would be evenly distributed out to all the users (Is this what happens to XRP when spent for IOU transactions) But the important thing being all this transaction data would remain internal to the ripple blockchain until someone wanted to spend them outside of the ripple network.
This means people want to make a trust network and make a IOU, then they case in some BTC to the ripple account, and use small denominations of BTC to make the IOU transaction, just like XRP does now. The spent BTC is redistributed to all users (internally a "satoshi" can be split into a billion peices, so if a billion transactions were made in a day each user would gain 1 satoshi.) and if a user wanted BTC back they cash it out of the ripple blockchain.
Maybe that would be more feasible if a satoshi could be split into a billion pieces already....
Again this is a naive viewpoint from myself, I have no idea if what I just described is implementable at all.
Unfortunately it looks like having 100 billion XRP that can be traded for other currency is a little devious, they say its anti spam, then they should have truly complemented BTC by using .00000001 BTC for anti spam (or .0000001 or .000001 ,etc...)
There's no good way to do this. Bitcoins could only be held on the Ripple system if someone were to gateway them, and there's no way to trust a particular gateway without having a central authority. Also, that would make Ripple's anti-spam system a Bitcoin spamming system as every Ripple transaction required a Bitcoin micro-transactions.Quote
I they really wanted to focus on trust based IOUs they could have easily used BTC to facilitate the transactions in small almost worthless denominations. But instead they create a stealth currency.
We honestly had no idea how to make that work for the reasons I describe above. Perhaps you could sketch out how your scheme would work.Quote
And a small handful own all the XRP? with current trades on various forums and sites making these people multi-millionaires already.
Billions of XRP will be given away shortly, as the system is ready to scale.Quote
I see no reason why someone could not build a ripple trust system on top of BTC.
I can give you a long list of reasons why that won't work. Maybe solutions could be found to each one of them, but I suspect that you don't see any reasons just because you haven't looked too closely at the problem. (But if you think you can make it work, by all means please work on it!)
Hmm, they should have used BTC in denominations of "satoshi" for the spam problem, this would maybe allow ripple to gain adoption and people would focus on the trust system more.
Unfortunately it looks like having 100 billion XRP that can be traded for other currency is a little devious, they say its anti spam, then they should have truly complemented BTC by using .00000001 BTC for anti spam (or .0000001 or .000001 ,etc...)
The XRP, we are told is all about anti spam and its not meant to compete with BTC. This is a load of crap. Lies lies lies!
I they really wanted to focus on trust based IOUs they could have easily used BTC to facilitate the transactions in small almost worthless denominations. But instead they create a stealth currency.
This new ripple is far too deceptive.
And a small handful own all the XRP? with current trades on various forums and sites making these people multi-millionaires already.
I see no reason why someone could not build a ripple trust system on top of BTC.
Unfortunately it looks like having 100 billion XRP that can be traded for other currency is a little devious, they say its anti spam, then they should have truly complemented BTC by using .00000001 BTC for anti spam (or .0000001 or .000001 ,etc...)
The XRP, we are told is all about anti spam and its not meant to compete with BTC. This is a load of crap. Lies lies lies!
I they really wanted to focus on trust based IOUs they could have easily used BTC to facilitate the transactions in small almost worthless denominations. But instead they create a stealth currency.
This new ripple is far too deceptive.
And a small handful own all the XRP? with current trades on various forums and sites making these people multi-millionaires already.
I see no reason why someone could not build a ripple trust system on top of BTC.
Can anyone confirm that this is what Ripple intends to do?
Yes.
If my assumption is correct the point of Ripple isn't to offer an alternate cryptocurrency, but to become an instant currency exchange (between both fiat and crypto and fiat-fiat crypto-crypto). So you can deposit any currency in to Ripple, and instantly convert it to whatever currency you want in the whole world, then cash it out and in to your fiat bank (or BitCoin wallet if you want BitCoins).
Can anyone confirm that this is what Ripple intends to do?
If so, it's going to be an amazing platform with the potential to squash PayPal. As (again, if my assumptions are correct) there will be no fees for converting, say GBP to USD like with PayPal. And the owners of Ripples only form of profit will be their new cryptocurrency (XRP).
Can anyone confirm that this is what Ripple intends to do?
If so, it's going to be an amazing platform with the potential to squash PayPal. As (again, if my assumptions are correct) there will be no fees for converting, say GBP to USD like with PayPal. And the owners of Ripples only form of profit will be their new cryptocurrency (XRP).
I'm still very skeptical of this new system. Especially the things talked about in this thread. If XRP are anti-spam, they should be invisible to the user (or as close to invisible as possible).
Say, for example, an anti-spam scheme limited someone to ten emails a day. Would you want the ten email limit hidden so that you sent ten and then all of a sudden couldn't send any emails? Or would you prefer it be very clear that there's a ten email limit with a counter that goes down with each email sent? The way you stop spam is to make people cognizant of the resources they're using and aware that they are scarce.Quote
Also, they list as "advanced" the trust network, which is the whole point of the original system.
Don't equate the internal system with the client. The client is designed to make it easy to do what we think people will want to do most. Right now, I don't think that's community credit, I think it's payment through gateways. Promoting community credit and making it easy for people to use and understand the consequences of what they're doing is a hard problem. I do truly believe that it could change the way people think about money in the future and having a payment system widely deployed that supported it will, I think, make it inevitable. But it's not Ripple's first step.
The original ripple concept is very good, and I have been using it for quite some time (ripplepay.com) and have found it quite useful.
I'm still very skeptical of this new system. Especially the things talked about in this thread. If XRP are anti-spam, they should be invisible to the user (or as close to invisible as possible).
Also, they list as "advanced" the trust network, which is the whole point of the original system.
I'm still very skeptical of this new system. Especially the things talked about in this thread. If XRP are anti-spam, they should be invisible to the user (or as close to invisible as possible).
Also, they list as "advanced" the trust network, which is the whole point of the original system.
1. double-spend. It seems ripple uses trust instead of mining to prevent double spend. Even if an IOU is issued by a trustworthy entity, people spending it may not. In contrast, in a colored-bitcoin scheme you only need to trust the IOU issuer, and the rest is protected by mining. If there is a trust-less and decentralized solution without any kind of proof-of-work or proof-or-stake, it would definitly be a bitcoin-killer (but I don't think this could happen).
Think of a room full of people who all agree with each other. To enter the room, you must agree with them. To disagree with them, you must leave the room. They all sit in this room maintaining continuous agreement on everything. Each of them who is honest puts their first priority on enforcing the rules of the room, their second priority on maintaining agreement with everyone who is also willing to follow the rules, and their third priority on accepting legitimate transactions provided they don't violate the first two rules. The rules of the room make it infeasible to agree to a transaction once a conflicting transaction has been agreed to -- such an agreement cannot be formed and be valid according to the rules.But the room is only so big, there are many other rooms, and you need XRPs to connect them all together. Since there is no built-in bootstrapping mechanism for distributing XRPs the workability of the system is questionable, and I'm having a hard time finding mention of a sensible approach to manual bootstrapping from any of the present room inhabitants. Am I missing something?
As with Freicoin, it seems a step in the wrong direction to go from a working-- if flawed-- example of automated bootstrapping in Bitcoin to an undefined manual one somewhere in the future.
Btw-- wrt:
https://ripple.com/wiki/Distributed_exchange#How_does_Ripple_handle_privacy.3F
I'm not sure who wrote "2. Proxy payments" but the word "anonymize" needs to be removed from that paragraph. A system where the recipient _and_ the third-party gateway can reveal the sender provides zero anonymity in any sense of the word. Unless of course you're comfortable saying that using Facebook sometimes and LinkedIn other times anonymizes your online data profile.
Selling the initial coins is a form of proof of work requirement, since in general on the whole money of whatever kind tends to be regarded as a kind of proof of someone somewhere once having either worked or gotten lucky (inherited someon else's work, discovered a pile of gold in the ground or whatever).
I am not suggesting using bitcoin's proof of work type of approach. How to distribute coins in a way that causes each and every actual person or entity to have only a tiny tiny tiny fraction of the total is an interesting problem that seemingly has not yet been solved, at least by private entities. Maybe governments could do it by issuing it to everyone on their citizenship records but even then presumably all the alternate identities that spy movies show them issuing to their secret agents and such would cause at least some "unfairness"...
-MarkM-
I am not suggesting using bitcoin's proof of work type of approach. How to distribute coins in a way that causes each and every actual person or entity to have only a tiny tiny tiny fraction of the total is an interesting problem that seemingly has not yet been solved, at least by private entities. Maybe governments could do it by issuing it to everyone on their citizenship records but even then presumably all the alternate identities that spy movies show them issuing to their secret agents and such would cause at least some "unfairness"...
-MarkM-
Well maybe if their pre-mine does in fact cause people not to use XRP as a currency then bitcoin might still be useful, otherwise presumably it makes sense to ask why use bitcoin, with its huge overhead cost of electricity and circuitry for securing its network, when you can use XRP instead?
That's a really interesting discussion. Does the ledger make proof of work obsolete? I don't think so. maaku, for example, compares proof of work with entropy in physics.
I just think it is more trust-less and will keep having its place. Probably no dominating though, as many of us would have thought.
I think xrp will be more widely used than btc, but will not make it disappear.
So maybe it comes down to whether the massive pre-mine makes it un-usable as a currency?
Maybe like i0coin was created as a zero-premine version of ixcoin there will be a r0pple once the source code is available, a zero-premine ripple?
Maybe like i0coin was created as a zero-premine version of ixcoin there will be a r0pple once the source code is available, a zero-premine ripple?
Would you make people hash just to get the initial distribution out? I think Ben Laury proposed it for his mining-less minettes.
I agree that if they don't distribute in a reasonable manner they will be just forked with another initial issuance method, but I don't think mining is much reasonable despite how much p2p it is.
My point is that while proof of work will still be used as the base of a security model, it shouldn't be preferred method for issuing, since it is very wasteful.
I don't see a ripple fork using proof of work only for issuance if that's what you're proposing.
i dont see why not to 'ripple-trust' me Thanx
Just remember, if you extend $5 in trust to someone, they can wind up owing you $5. If you don't have a settlement agreement with them, that could mean that $5 you intended to be able to spend or cash out is now a worthless IOU. Trust in Ripple is a powerful thing. Thanx
Created one wallet for myself too, rwZ1LnRGDxkKUEKhGu7hYhmas2sapWMEjP any good guy out there? 
thnx
thnxim good.. and have an account...
should i 'trust' you ?
i dont see why not to 'ripple-trust' me
Thanx
Well maybe if their pre-mine does in fact cause people not to use XRP as a currency then bitcoin might still be useful, otherwise presumably it makes sense to ask why use bitcoin, with its huge overhead cost of electricity and circuitry for securing its network, when you can use XRP instead?
So maybe it comes down to whether the massive pre-mine makes it un-usable as a currency?
Maybe like i0coin was created as a zero-premine version of ixcoin there will be a r0pple once the source code is available, a zero-premine ripple?
-MarkM-
So maybe it comes down to whether the massive pre-mine makes it un-usable as a currency?
Maybe like i0coin was created as a zero-premine version of ixcoin there will be a r0pple once the source code is available, a zero-premine ripple?
-MarkM-
So is ripple a competitor or friend to bitcoin? Still having trouble getting my head around it.
If you mined all the bitcoins in the first block you would have XRP.
Created one wallet for myself too, rwZ1LnRGDxkKUEKhGu7hYhmas2sapWMEjP any good guy out there? thnx
thnxim good.. and have an account...
should i 'trust' you ?
Created one wallet for myself too, rwZ1LnRGDxkKUEKhGu7hYhmas2sapWMEjP any good guy out there? thnx
thnx 
So I have a ripple account. rME4iXc1wzG47nbFd8yZ71n6qxrGmnpARE
Yay?
Yay?
Jump to: