Topic: Ripple: A Distributed Exchange for Bitcoin - page 2. (Read 66657 times)

1. You don't need much XRP. You only need a maximum of 50 XRP (costs 0,00034 BTC which is about 0.18 USD) to use the Ripple network for the rest of your life.
2. The source wasn't ready to be published. They were doing major developing back then so it'd be stupid to publish the source and let people set up nodes which need updating like daily due to hard forks.
3. Ripple doesn't compete with Bitcoin really. Ripple is another kind of system.
4. Ripple was first of its kind afaik.

If you don't like that Ripple took all the XRP to themselves at the start, fork it and make alt-Ripple. I wonder why nobody has done this yet, though there were a lot of people saying they will immediately fork Ripple (to remove the "premine") when possible.

Bitcoin taught us a few things:

1. don't do a premine or IPO
2. Open source the code from day 1
3. Anything based on debt is going to have a hard time at this point of evolution in the virtual currency space.
4. the importance of being first to market

So you call Ripple a scam but you NEVER tell reason why. If there are some problems inside the Ripple Labs company, it doesn't make Ripple protocol a scam. If someone dumps 9% of all XRPs, it's still not a scam. Could someone explain me why Ripple is a scam?

You have been awfully quiet on this forum.

But here is more info for the kiddies that proved what I suspected would happen all along even way back a year ago when you called me a troll for calling ripple a scam....now look...

http://www.reddit.com/r/Ripple/comments/26ccz3/ripple_board_member_resigns/

I could post many more steps until the process is atomic ("click on trade" --> "select USD"...) or fewer (Deposit USD at gateway, send to Bitcoin address in Ripple client, done!).

If you use Litecoin to arbitrage between let's say MtGox and Bitstamp, LTC simply would cost more USD at MtGox than at Bitstamp again, you gain nothing compared to just withdrawing BTC (that are more expensive at MtGox).

Besides technical differences in the architecture, Ripple is different from Litecoin in the sense that it is a market for things representing assets rather than an asset itself, with the only exeption being XRPs. LTC, BTC, NMC etc. are not redeemable, Ripple IOUs are.

As I said: LTC etc. are very good at being assets but suck at trading these for anything else than non-reversible digital currencies, Ripple wants to be one of these non-reversible digital currencies AND also enable anyone to create these currencies, which opposed to LTC are backed by real assets. The valuation of these then is done via an inbuilt market and order book system.

If you want to buy a piece of bread from me for 1 LTC, you can not do that - you can only buy a promise from me to receive 1 piece of bread in the future (either explicitly on Ripple or implicitly via a contract) since there is no way at all (even creating "Breadcoin" that is backed by bread just means it is an IOU) to trade the bread directly in an atomic transaction that doesn't involve IOUs. You can of course make the LTC physical (the other way round) by creating a 1 LTC paper wallet, and then trade directly, this is again an IOU however, as the transaction is not taking place on the blockchain and I have to trust you to not have noted down the key.

Litecoin does one and one one thing -- allow you to send Litecoin from one account to another. Ripple allows you to send dollars from one person to another. Ripple allows you to hold the currency of your choice and make payments in the currencies of other people's choices with direct access to the very same liquidity regardless of whether your transfer is for one penny or a million dollars.

Ripple pays a price for these advantages, of course. There are no free lunches. One of them is that it can't move the assets directly and therefore requires gateways.

  - wanted to write something similar
 

[sarcasm]
Yeah, that sounds pretty simple.
[/sarcasm]
Do I also have to perform a blood ritual in order to transfer my soul to the ripple d(a)emon ?

PS.
No, seriously. That does not sound simple at all. Comparing to simplicity of sending Litecoins from one account to another, this is sounds like crap.

What improvement does Ripple bring over Litecoin ? I still can't grasp the concept.

It is a bona fide distributed exchange, but liquidity is very low.

1) You find a gateway that takes a deposit from your bank account, for example Bitstamp.
2) You deposit your money at this gateway and withdraw to your Ripple account. To do this, you need to have enough capacity in a trust line to this gateway, so they actually can send you the money.
3) You either find a gateway that allows you to withdraw BTC IOUs or just use the built-in Bitcoin bridge.
4a) (the gateway) You deposit BTC at this gateway's account. Ripple automatically gives you a quote when trying to send them money based on current market conditions.
5a) (the gateway) You withdraw these BTC from the gateway to your cold wallet.
4b) (the bridge) You enter a Bitcoin address in the "sending" part of the Ripple client. You then automatically get a quote on how much of your USDs it costs to send them depending on current market conditions.
5b) (the bridge) You actually send the funds (triggering one or several trades along the way) which are behind the scenes converted to BTC IOUs that get redeemed at a special gateway that automatically then sends the BTC shortly afterwards, no need for an account at any gateway.

Compared to BTC where you deposit at an exchange, trade there and withdraw from there, the deposit point and withdrawal point can be distinct entities in ripple, while the trading happens on Ripple itself. This allows for easier regulations and also for better competition. As with any exchange though, market depth is usually also a large factor, so this is why there is not that much action and then again because there is not much action, there is not a lot of depth etc. On the upside, it is quite easy to make markets on Ripple.

I'm still confused about how Ripple works. Is there like, a simple, straight-to-the-point guide that walks you through the process of using Ripple to exchange your money into another currency?

Like, say I have fiat in my bank account, and I want acquire real bitcoins that I can add to my cold wallet. How can I use Ripple to accomplish this?

If you add BTCLTC pairs on every exchange now, this would have no real influence on the BTCUSD markets... it is already very easy to get money off MtGox - but only if it is in BTC. Adding LTC, NMC, FTC, PPC or whatever other hard asset (yes, also XRP) will NOT change this and also not allow for better arbitrage. Ripple allows you to issue something that is tradeable like a BTC (no reversals, fast transfers...) but that maps something that is redeemable at the borders of the network. Neither LTC, NMC etc. are redeemable for anything, they are only transferable. You would still have to have LTCUSD pairs somewhere liquid and if you have that, LTC would be then more expensive on MtGox than on Bitstamp again.

Adding on layers and layers of hard assets won't change the fact that it is very easy to transfer through these assets but very hard to jump the borders to assets that are not digital in the first place and/or adhere to different rules (like being reversible).

If you only had cash (the closest thing to unregulated and irreversible USD) and a relatively secure way to send it (via mail for example) and make sure there are no counterfeits, you wouldn't have any kind of problem that MtGox currently has for example, having issues with AML/KYC laws and banking regulations/restrictions. They could just get a nice big safe and store their dollar bills there.

Good point. The cryptocurrency with the best liquidity will always be the best arbitrage medium. As long as LTC has better liquidity than XRP.

The advantage with LTC is that it's also decentralized/open source.

So just what problem is ripple solving again?
 

-

Wouldn't it be better for exchanges to adapt Litecoin instead and use that to move funds ?

Except it isn't. If it was, and there was any liquidity to speak of it could serve a useful purpose for arbitrage, etc.

IMHO Ripple's only chance of success is getting bitcoin exchanges to become Ripple gateways. Bitstamp was a good start, but that's just one.

Since bitstamp is on the ripple network and uses ripple to allow people to both fund and withdraw funds (at least for verified users...)

The inventor of this implementation of Ripple is the original creator and owner of Mtgox

Bitcoin also does not cover much (if any) new grounds - it just makes them smoother.

See the title of this thread:
"Ripple: A Distributed Exchange for Bitcoin"

Ripple offers a system to exchange IOUs for assets like Bitcoins or others with each other easily on an open, mostly unregulated market. This thread deals with the methods on how to do so and some misconceptions (as well as some well funded criticism). Ripple is much older than Bitcoin (one could argue that the original concept "Hawala" exists already VERY long) and the current incarnation of RippleLabs is not the first implementation of such a system. In fact, there still exists a Ripple classic client as far as I know.

You as well seem to neglect the trading aspect of money. Within Bitcoin, all you can get are other bitcoin, which stand for themselves (unless you consider IOUs issued as colored coins or mastercoins - though then you have IOUs again). With Ripple all you can get (well, nearly all, there's XRP - but imho you shouldn't "invest" in these) are things that represent something outside of the system. Instead of restriction (which makes sense for an asset that tries to be worth something) you have abundance (which makes sense for a system that can map anything and everything and where tokens actually already represent something).

While Bitcoin tries to be the ultimate fiat money (in the sense of "there shall be money", not in the sense of governmentally issued money) and hard asset, Ripple tries to be the ultimate market and transfer mechanism. These can, do and will go hand in hand - for example since Bitcoin transactions can (nearly) not be reversed, they are also one of the most traded asset IOUs in Ripple right now, as gateways are happy to receive them. It took Google just 2 days or so, to shut down the wallet account of a gateway that used them to buy XRP in contrast (it works again... now you can buy XRP which are easily convertable to BTC with Credit Cards again, probably by far the cheapest way to buy BTC with CCs). In the future, this will get even better and better, with people not even realizing that their Bitcoin payments were bought on the fly on Ripple. Adding in Litecoin support or any other non-reversible, pseudonymous currency/payment system for that matter is also just a matter of coding a small gateway.

Just like some people here boasted that "through bitbills, someone might have already shopped at your service in BTC without you even realizing it", Ripple already works this way in the BTC direction right now. I would say that alone makes it worthy of being allowed a thread here, other projects are unfortunately not that far yet.

My very personal opinion to Ripple:

The inventor worked for years on a concept. Then in 2009 when Bitcoin has been invented he saw the shortcuts of his system and was in fear that he will loose years of work just because a genius and unexpected invention came. He decided then to publish things fast and is running behind Bitcoin with a changed concept.

It is expensive, has some serious shortcuts and nobody needs Ripple because it just extends the exchange ledger that traditional money traders already had. Give me a single use case for Ripple which is not covered without Ripple. And finally Ripple has nothing to do with Bitcoin - what is the reason to discuss this legacy system in this forum ?