Topic: Ripple: A Distributed Exchange for Bitcoin - page 9. (Read 66712 times)

i learned a lot more about Ripple this weekend too.

the economic assumptions behind the concept are highly dubious imo. 

If Ripple wants to be taken seriously, they need to revamp their website and wiki to remove all the misleading information and to clearly articulate their value.

Provide concrete use case examples on how it is beneficial to end-users, merchants, and gateways.   Don't use fluffy words like "revolutionary", "cheap", "fast" without qualifying and quantifying with facts and figures.

And if it is not planning to open source the system, remove it from the site, don't continue to lie.

Finally, provide true transparency on how the initial XRP are distributed.      

I listened to Chris Larsen today in the alt chain panel and I can say that after all the questions posed about ripple were asked I was not convinced by Chris' that ripple is a trustworthy decentralized system.

Many claims and not much proof given it is STILL closed source.

Ripple / OpenCoin Inc had a booth at the conference. Now what for?

None of the other alt coins need a booth to promote the chain. This shows that ripple is centralized and you must trust the ripple devs and the OpenCoin owners that they will not screw you or get shut down by regulators.

   This speaks volumes. 

Totally agree..the client needs work!!!

Quite. I don't know whether Ripple will succeed, and I have concerns about how the founders plan to cash in. However it is too complicated to be a scam. Moreover it is hard to take seriously someone who cannot spell "harbinger" correctly.

I never asked for it and i didn't get PAID, i got DONATED. It is a significant difference. For once, I didn't ask for it and i put the link in my signature long BEFORE i was paid.
I don't sell my views for money, you know because I understand what "honour" means.


No, we cannot. I am on topic. The OP was asking why are people producing new Ripple clones when there is original Ripple avaiable. I am answering. It is because RIPPLE IS A SCAM. Period.


It is not the same algorithm so it is not "the same crypto". Some (more or less) parts of it are similiar. So this is a lie.


I am not really into betting - I do not care.

You are not listening. I wasn't saying that Ripple is a threat to Bitcoin anywhere.
I just want to warn people so they don't get scammed.

I also do not care what Ripple will be in the future, after (if ?) they open the sources. I only care what Ripple is now. And it is a SCAM.

Give it rest, it's old and tired.  You're gonna look like a fool in a few years, after it 's proven that ripple was in no way a threat to bitcoin.  Both will still be around, despite your FUD.

The only people I know of in this forum that get paid to deliver a certain message are the ones with this link in their signature...

Could we please get back to topic and focus on the viability of ripple as an exchange? There are enough threads out there where you can endlessly discuss your scam theories.

As far as I understand it, they actually are based on the same crypto, what's the thing that makes you doubt it? Also they can print more xrp only with some serious effort and would risk their reputation. I tried placing a bet that this won't happen on bitbet but it wasn't accepted. I'm willing to bet with you (escrowed of course) however privately if you like - put your money where your mouth is!

Oh, maybe because ripple is a scam ? [check my signature]
Also, latest posts of yours are a pretty straightforward proof that you work for them. How much do they pay you per post ?

Also, did i mention that RIPPLE IS A SCAM ?. If not, then I am saying it now: RIPPLE IS A SCAM. It is neither "decentralized" or "open source". It also does not base on the same underlying cryptography as Bitcoin. Rules can be also changed at will, and they can print more XRP at will.

All the stuff on their site & wiki - It is all bullshit & lies.

----
In other news: Ripple is a scam.

If the source-code becomes open, there will be a lot of filled wallets in the system. What if somebody finds a flaw in the code? My question is, can it ever be opened with a lot of assets inside?

It's packed with suspense... what will happen first?
-server code gets open-sourced
-OpenCoin shut down by authorities
-server successfully reverse engineered (like World of Warcraft
-a ripple clone starts and is the hit of the day

Given the current XRP market cap (if market is right)
it will get finally decentralized and fixed rather than hacked or busted.

Something different:

The official Ripple client is wonky at best and unreliable at worst when it comes to actual trading - offers that are displayed under "My offers" are not integrated into the order book or randomly disappear from there when you reload the client. There is no mention of transfer fees until they actually hit you (WTF WeExchange!). Issuers of IOUs are rarely displayed, so if you deal in several BTC IOUs, you don't know which ones you just traded.

These are mostly interface and maybe connectivity issues, but these were the more annoying things that immediately struck me. Trading itself went quite smooth and quick and I made quite some nice deals so far. Let's see how this develops.

Ponzi schemes pay interest out of deposited money instead of what they claim to earn money from.
You probably mean pyramid scheme.

Still these accusations are far from new: 2-3 years ago I heard nearly all arguments against ripple already in other threads. They were warning people to get into bitcoin...

ripple is the definition of the ponzi scheme , early adopters will be paid the rest will lose their money

I think it is both this and, more importantly, the fact that Ripple doesn't need miners. I think that is where the real resistance comes from. The first concern can be removed by simply releasing the code, which I'm confident they'll do. But the second objection is permanent. Personally I don't think it's an argument against Ripple, but in favour of it, provided it is sufficiently safe, which we don't know yet.

I really like the idea of Ripple.  I think the main problem with it is that it's insanely complex and frankly the website does a lousy job of making it clear.  Maybe it's complex enough that it's not an easy concept to make clear - because, in a way, Ripple is trying to emulate the entire existing financial system, except as an exchange rather than a fractional lending system.  IOUs are what people have in bank accounts, after all, that's why they're FDIC insured (at least in the USA), to prevent a recurrence of what happened in the Great Depression.

Here's my summary of bitcoiners' objections to Ripple:

1) It's too complex, how does this work anyway? 

A valid objection.  I couldn't even find the register page on the Ripple website without someone pointing me to the link and I'm pretty tech savvy.

2) The founders are just in it to print money.

Profit motive - every business has this anyway.  Isn't this why most people use bitcoins - to cut out the middlemen and make more money as businesses?  Also, the founder of bitcoin has the equilivent of $100 million dollars worth of bitcoin, so the same could be said of bitcoin, although it's not exactly liquid since the value of bitcoin would crash if he/she / they try to cash them in.

3) It's not open.  I can't look at the source.

Another valid objection, at least for now.  The servers aren't open source and we don't know when they will become open source.

4) It's yet another alt coin.

This one I'm not sure I buy.  Yes, it's another alt coin, but unlike most of them, Ripple actually has something unique about it that could lead a real advantage to the bitcoin community if it takes off.

5) It's basically an alt-coin version of a central bank.

I suspect this may be the biggest objection to Ripple, and in a way, the objection to which all the others stem from.  It's too centralized, they're out to make money, etc, they all ultimately stem from this objection that it's too much like a central bank / clearing house for most people's taste.  Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect this is why a lot of people don't like Ripple.

why is this thread dead?
everything said about it ? i really like the idea about an distributed exchange
it would be distributed by all servers which are running rippled (not many at the moment)
but i think it wont be distributed by currency
if you have USD IOUs from bitstamp and maybe USD IOUs from btc-e then they are not the same. you will have to find someone to trade USD/USD to buy bitcoins from btc-e with bitstamp USD deposit
is this correct?

Here is a simple schema for a Ripple-based semi-automated insurance pool I could easily code and may actually turn into a company (BitInsure):

If anyone wants to start this with me (a lot on my plate) or found this independently I will fund you.

You could set a required time to remain in the pool, a pool expiration date, or if your pool is large enough, let trusted people leave or join at any time.

In an automated application you choose people everyone in the group (or the majority - 51%+) trusts:

The application adds up the amount each trusted individual hopes to insure

10            
12
20
100
20
30
22
44
67
89
__

414

The application divides the amount each individual wishes to insure by the total of the pool minus that contribution

0.024
0.029
0.048
0.24
0.048
0.072
0.053
0.11
0.16
0.21

You assume each wallet has an equal chance of theft

The application multiplies each individual's percentage contribution to the pool against every individual insured amount

i.e. for the 100 contribution:

0.24 * each insured

2.4
2.88
4.8
(24 - weight this back out by percentage)
4.8
7.2
5.28
10.56
16.08
21.36

The application would trust the 100 contributor on each Ripple holder's wallet for the corresponding above amount of BTC (weighted out).

The application would add 9 trusts to each Ripple wallet corresponding to the BTC amounts calculated as a percentage of the total pool each insured amount represents - this adds up to the total amount insured for each wallet.

If a wallet or BTC amount were reported stolen, the application would issue IOUs or send XRP corresponding to each of these trusts.

The larger the pool and the less percentage a given insured amount constitutes of that pool, the less each insured entity has to pay to a specific loss.

(Of course I use a proprietary algorithm, this is just for example's sake - pure weighting is not entirely fair to large stake holders)

Risk is spread out among the insured - no transfer costs - no or little insurance fees - no overhead - no fees - only pay a small percentage of a trusted loss - you can pick who you trust and want in your pool.

The potential features on this design are boundless. You could go so far as to create profiles and upload credit history/health records to increase your chances of acceptance into a pool (vote for trust) which people would be inclined to do to decrease their own costs when something bad happens to a member.

This is a simple example of how distributed insurance can and will work with the Ripple protocol.

Global, frictionless, libertarian, decentralized insurance.