Topic: Ripple: A Distributed Exchange for Bitcoin - page 6. (Read 66712 times)
what seems strange to me is that after giveaway the XRP appreciated by 20%
open source means quite simply: the source is open for all to see. There is really no justification for why you would want to open source it later, unless of course you were waiting to file patents.
We've explained this several times in many places. There's a very important reason not to release the source too early -- once the source is released, the system is very hard to change.Imagine if Bitcoin had gone open source before the decision to decrease the block reward was made. Groups that had invested in mining might oppose the choice to make the block reward schedule decrease, even if that was in the long-term best interests of almost everyone. We chose a plan that allows us to get community input while the design can still be changed, and we are still making changes to the design based on community input. (We believe we now know what the design will be when we open source. So we're not changing that design, just finishing it.)
As soon as the source is open, design changes will require convincing the community. And even some design changes that almost everyone wants may be very difficult to do.
Saying that too much community input would slow down your development is a cop-out because you could release the code for people to review and ignore input...but that would also be somewhat awkward ignoring customer base input.
We can't release the code for people to review and ignore input. If we ignored input, we'd be in the minority and be ignored. Ripple is based on consensus. As soon as the code is open sourced, other people start running validators, and people start trusting those validators, the network will be run by that consensus. We can make suggestions, but if they are rejected by that consensus, if we follow them, we will be ignored just like any Bitcoin transaction that doesn't meet the rules is ignored.why does it seem that all these digital currency companies springing up all seem to have some kind of idiosyncratic interpretation of what 'open source' means?
open source means quite simply: the source is open for all to see. There is really no justification for why you would want to open source it later, unless of course you were waiting to file patents.
I've solicited technical solutions to this problem on this forum. It would be awesome if Bitcoins could be used on other decentralized systems without having to trade on the blockchain (both because it would be faster and because it could enable things like microtransactions) or trust a central authority to hold the Bitcoins. I've yet to hear one. I'm still looking.
have you looked at this? https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwUFHE6KYsM0ZkxLVmFwbXQ3ck0/edit?usp=sharing
Seems I was under the wrong impression that ripple was not open source, dunno why.
The server is not open source yet. Once the server is open source, we'll have to obtain a consensus on every feature change that affects what transactions are valid or what effects they have, just like Bitcoin does. I used to say we sometimes make those kinds of changes three times a day. We're probably down to once a week at most now.how will the server be licensed?
how will this consensus be determined?
What I think people need to realize is that opencoin wants people to use a kind of money that they (opencoin) can mint at will.
This is not true and would be visible immediately to all participants in the Ripple network.It is not as hard as in bitcoin to change network rules, but it is possible, yes. It is however a premise of the whole system that 100 billion XRP are being issued, just like the 21 million cap of Bitcoin. Both numbers can be changed (in Bitcoin about 3-4 pool operators are able to force that upon the entire network), both very likely are not going to be changed.
Nevertheless there is probably a far percentage of XRP in circulation than of BTC - so even if they are not going to be minted, they can be distributed at will.
I think more so that you can't release the code because others would simply fork it and make your code now worth less than before. Call it a form of dilution. You folks as a business have a vested interest as well as your investors not to open the source code.
This doesn't sound unreasonable. Let's pretend that its true - OpenCoin is waiting until enough assets are in the current ledger chain to where any fork will not have enough gateway support to be viable. So what? Is it wrong that OpenCoin wants to profit from their work?But is that really how opencoin presents itself to the world? I say: no.
The guys making ripple have the word 'open' in their comapny's name. They claim to be open, they say they are going to open source the code.
I don't understand what use does an honest business has for such promises. As a programmer, my opinion on the whole discussion about the code license is: code or STFU. That's what free software is, code, not promises, thank you. Honestly, if you want to earn respect on the free software community, come forward with your code, not with useless promises.
There is also this huge cloud of fog around what the project really is. A lot of vague info, a lot of "jump in now and understand latter".
The code is a detail though. What I think people need to realize is that opencoin wants people to use a kind of money that they (opencoin) can mint at will. Why is this not stated in their website with bit red letters as a warning? It is by far the most important details of the project. If even after that people want to use it, then good luck with your business.
discussing if ripple is open source or not is not the topic of this thread i think
its about if ripple is good for trading bitcoin on it because (hopefully someday) it has a distributed orderbook on all servers running rippled (today only 2 i think)
so DDOS attacks are not working anymore i guess. the only thing is you have to trust the gateway which is holding your BTC.. but its the same as trusting mtgox oder bitstamp or someone else these days..
its about if ripple is good for trading bitcoin on it because (hopefully someday) it has a distributed orderbook on all servers running rippled (today only 2 i think)
so DDOS attacks are not working anymore i guess. the only thing is you have to trust the gateway which is holding your BTC.. but its the same as trusting mtgox oder bitstamp or someone else these days..
First of all there is no such thing as "intellectual property".
I know, I do not believe in "intellectual property". But still, lawyers & governments do.
In the present xrp is cheap and plentiful and the only way you are going to run into issues is if you are an exceptionally social person or very broke.
Which has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
First of all there is no such thing as "intellectual property". You obviously any subtle treatment of this subject is going to be lost on you if you believe in such a misleading frame.
In the present xrp is cheap and plentiful and the only way you are going to run into issues is if you are an exceptionally social person or very broke.
No. You do not understand what "open source" means. Open Source is not when you get access to the source.
Open Source is when AUTHOR publicly states the license it is on, no other way.
Otherwise author can always sue you for illegally distributing his intellectual property.
For example: there is a lot of people and organizations who have access to Windows source, but Windows is NOT open source. It is NOT the same.
Do you actually know what you are talking about ?
Because i hate wasting time on people who talk random crap.
That's in the future (or one of possible futures). We are here and now - let's talk about the present.
That's what I am saying. But they are NOT releasing it yet while claiming to be Open Source. And that is simple scam.
In the present xrp is cheap and plentiful and the only way you are going to run into issues is if you are an exceptionally social person or very broke.
Unreleased software can be open source.
No. You do not understand what "open source" means. Open Source is not when you get access to the source.
Open Source is when AUTHOR publicly states the license it is on, no other way.
Otherwise author can always sue you for illegally distributing his intellectual property.
For example: there is a lot of people and organizations who have access to Windows source, but Windows is NOT open source. It is NOT the same.
Do you have a binary of the server? If not you do not have the right to the source.
Do you actually know what you are talking about ?
Because i hate wasting time on people who talk random crap.
It will be possible to fork it once it is released...and in fact an attempt at doing so is planned.
Xrp is an unimportant detail. Even if opencoin did print more...which they won't, it doesn't matter. (...) but concerns about the amount of xrp are a distraction at best.
Xrp is an unimportant detail. Even if opencoin did print more...which they won't, it doesn't matter. (...) but concerns about the amount of xrp are a distraction at best.
That's in the future (or one of possible futures). We are here and now - let's talk about the present.
The source is important and it is important that they release it
That's what I am saying. But they are NOT releasing it yet while claiming to be Open Source. And that is simple scam.
Unreleased software can be open source.
No. You do not understand what "open source" means. Open Source is not when you get access to the source.
Open Source is when AUTHOR publicly states the license it is on, no other way.
Otherwise author can always sue you for illegally distributing his intellectual property.
For example: there is a lot of people and organizations who have access to Windows source, but Windows is NOT open source. It is NOT the same.
Do you have a binary of the server? If not you do not have the right to the source.
Do you actually know what you are talking about ?
Because i hate wasting time on people who talk random crap.
It will be possible to fork it once it is released...and in fact an attempt at doing so is planned.
Xrp is an unimportant detail. Even if opencoin did print more...which they won't, it doesn't matter. (...) but concerns about the amount of xrp are a distraction at best.
Xrp is an unimportant detail. Even if opencoin did print more...which they won't, it doesn't matter. (...) but concerns about the amount of xrp are a distraction at best.
That's in the future (or one of possible futures). We are here and now - let's talk about the present.
The source is important and it is important that they release it
That's what I am saying. But they are NOT releasing it yet while claiming to be Open Source. And that is simple scam.
What you said is completely irrelevant. The current facts are:
- Ripple is NOT open source (lie !)
- Ripple is NOT decentralized (lie !)
- Ripple does NOT use the same underlying cryptography as Bitcoin (lie !)
- Ripple can print any amount of XRP they want at any time (especially if government "asks" them to)
Regulators will not kill ripple ? It is EXTREMELY EASY for regulators to kill Ripple. All they need to do is force OpenCoin to inflate ripple into oblivion (or they can just send them to Guantanamo - whichever is easier).
Also if current Ripple is closed by government and they actually open the sources, the new - open sourced version will be something completely different (as it will not be centralized).
- Ripple is NOT open source (lie !)
- Ripple is NOT decentralized (lie !)
- Ripple does NOT use the same underlying cryptography as Bitcoin (lie !)
- Ripple can print any amount of XRP they want at any time (especially if government "asks" them to)
Regulators will not kill ripple ? It is EXTREMELY EASY for regulators to kill Ripple. All they need to do is force OpenCoin to inflate ripple into oblivion (or they can just send them to Guantanamo - whichever is easier).
Also if current Ripple is closed by government and they actually open the sources, the new - open sourced version will be something completely different (as it will not be centralized).
First of all, you have no grounds to call me a liar.
Misunderstanding. I did not call YOU a liar, i called Ripple/OpenCoins liars.
we can argue back and forth on #1 (is 'unreleased open source' 'open source' enough?)
There is nothing to argue about. It is either open source now or it isn't. And it isn't so it is logical that IT IS NOT.
, but even given those caveats Ripple is definitely decentralized, and you're confused if you think otherwise.
There is nothing decentralized about ripple if they can CENTRALLY print more XRPs (which they admitted themselves BTW).
It is simple logic and you are just wrong. Nothing to argue about at all.
This only works if the network accepts it...
Bullshit. As long as there is no open sourced server code, the network can do nothing but accept it.
It is not possible to FORK Ripple, so how can the network *NOT* accept it ? Does it have any choice ?
The only real choice that is given is to stop using Ripple.
Unreleased software can be open source. Do you have a binary of the server? If not you do not have the right to the source. It will be possible to fork it once it is released...and in fact an attempt at doing so is planned.
Xrp is an unimportant detail. Even if opencoin did print more...which they won't, it doesn't matter. The source is important and it is important that they release it but concerns about the amount of xrp are a distraction at best. Don't invest in them as they are not made for that purpose.
I have yet to see an intelligent discussion...
About WHY the people who control Gox are focusing their energies on Ripple...
About WHY the people who control Gox are focusing their energies on Ripple...
Are they?
They must view Gox as the dinosaur that it is...
But, no worries, BTC has BitStamp and the Slovenian Banking System.
But, no worries, BTC has BitStamp and the Slovenian Banking System.
They've held it together so far. They're obviously learning about running an exchange as they go.
you all know that if you opened the source, there will not be much validators who joins your network, but there will lots of alternative Ripple-XRP system show up, and the ones who distribute the XRP in a predictable and fairly way will win the competition, and at the last, the 100% pre-mined XRP will has no value.
As a validator, I would prefer OpenCoin have a way to make money and pay lots of developers' salaries instead of the Bitcoin open source model where no company is able to profit directly and they have to go around begging for donations to pay Gavin.
this is just a sleezy way to describe the situation and represents a true lack of understanding of what open source represents. as if Bitcoin is having a problem with developers. pffft.
Bitcoin is doing fantastic with it's open source model and this weekend's Conference showed just that.
This might have some merit if BTC was competing with LTC...
But it's now competing with Google, EBay, Amazon, PayPal, and the Big Banks...
And Gavin comes across as a Fed Trojan Horse anyway...
Gavin is on record as supporting the "regulation of air guitars".
I have yet to see an intelligent discussion...
About WHY the people who control Gox are focusing their energies on Ripple...
These guys and their Venture backers are Master Strategists.
They must view Gox as the dinosaur that it is...
But, no worries, BTC has BitStamp and the Slovenian Banking System.
More like pre-printed.
Use of the term "pre-mine" in relation to XRP is not cleverly derogatory, it's patently idiotic.
XRPs were created out of thin air by a corporation, not "pre-mined".
XRPs were created out of thin air by a corporation, not "pre-mined".
Hahaha
Spot on.
Use of the term "pre-mine" in relation to XRP is not cleverly derogatory, it's patently idiotic. XRPs were created out of thin air by a corporation.
This is shameless promotion on my part, but I believe I found a way to eliminate the need for 'gateways' and 'trust' between individuals while allowing the other features of ripple (sending any currency, built in exchange) and then some.
1) 'Deposit' and 'Withdraw' any currency without a gateway or 'trust'.
2) Earn interest on deposits in all currencies.
3) Built in exchange between currencies.
4) block-chain based with mining (though I suppose you could implement 'consensus' based approach with pre-mining as a variation).
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2238954
I am looking for ideas, feedback, criticism, and ideas for improvement.
1) 'Deposit' and 'Withdraw' any currency without a gateway or 'trust'.
2) Earn interest on deposits in all currencies.
3) Built in exchange between currencies.
4) block-chain based with mining (though I suppose you could implement 'consensus' based approach with pre-mining as a variation).
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2238954
I am looking for ideas, feedback, criticism, and ideas for improvement.
Ripple is a business. Them releasing their source would be like Microsoft or any large software company releasing their code to the public which would make their product now worth a lot less because everyone could get their product for free essentially.
It's a really good business model, and they are making many people jealous for not being the first to come up with this idea 
You should instead be happy for them and waiting for the completion of this new toy that they are making and giving to the community!
sorry a few others have....just they've been unsuccessful because labelled a scam......ripples so far more successful because of mass promotion and greed of early adopters
essentially you're condoning a closed source system
As has been stated repeatedly, they plan to open the source code.
Quote
...that "traps" enough participants and their money into it to the point there is no turning back.
Who said that you have to put all your money into XRP? Did I say that? No. Did anyone say that you have to move significant funds into XRP in order to use Ripple? Nope, no one said that either. I'm also not suggesting that you buy XRP - did those words leave my keyboard? Nope. In fact I am very clear that XRPs are quite risky as an investment and that the source code needs to become open in order to succeed.
You are not arguing in good faith. You are merely repeating the same things over and over again without really adding anything into the discussion.
You said that about me. You are saying the same things over and over.
Also you obviously condone market manipulation huh? You don't think it is so bad.
Wow just wow.
Jump to: