Ripple has good features. XRP will depend on how its managed.
XRP will compete with bitcoin, wich is descentralized and opensource. OpenCoin is limited in the management of XRP in a way it doesnt turns into a bad choice when compared to bitcoin. Otherwise, people would use XRP just to pay for transactions made in fiat money via gateways, and use bitcoin as a digital currency via bitcoin client, bitpay and whatever will still come.
People here angry about OpenCoin and the ripple network can keep using bitcoin, what is the problem?
I bet they are not doing an "anti-ripple" campaign to save theis similars from being scammed, this would be too generous. People are worried about something else. Maybe the losses a successful ripple network could cause them? They have bitcoin based business? Or jealousy? Or, "they gonna be rich, its not fair, Im the one who deserve it", etc, or they are just buying lots of XRP and fearing people to keep buying cheap.
Bitcoin will always be there. But now it has a possible competitor.
Topic: Ripple or Bitcoin - page 35. (Read 34131 times)
OpenCoin Inc spent VC money to buy up XRPs on the open markets to get a bigger market cap so they can attract more VC funding. They can't release too much or the price will fall back to the real values (without their own buying).
That's an interesting accusation. Do you have any evidence of this?
What evidence would you need?
Any actual evidence will be fine.
oh and LOL
(don't mind me laughing)
Just means someone needs to remake the protocol where no foundation holds half the XRP Been pondering how to apply a ripple design but redo it without it being bitcoin
It's pretty easy, just allow submitters of proof-of-work to create XRP, and adjust the difficulty so that the number of solved proofs per ledger is below a threshold.
Proof of work could go like this:
1) Put the hash of the previous ledger into a SHA256 hashing context
2) Put a nonce into the hashing context
3) Hash the result.
4) If it is greater than the target difficulty, increment the nonce and go to 1
If you don't find a solution before the next ledger close then you start over with the closed ledger's hash.
Now if you do find a solution then you submit it to the network as a special transaction. Very likely, a few other people will also find solutions. To break the tie, the consensus process could pick the solution with the lowest value.
If the difficulty is too low then there will be many solutions per ledger. To prevent proof of work from flooding the network, the algorithm for adjusting the difficulty would increase the difficulty until the number of valid submitted proofs per ledger was below some number, say 200.
At some point you want XRP to stop being created so after some ledger number, say the one hundred millionth ledger, no more proof of work can produce XRP.
I'm no expert at cryptosystems so this rough outline will probably need refinement.
Sounds about right I was thinking more on the application and advertising side but with a different remake of the ripple protocol using it's strengths but also trying to focus on the weak-points.
Something like a Proof of Concept
Decentralized Stock Exchange
A web of interconnected exchanges based on trust
Central Exchange Servers and multiple markets connecting worldwide
24/H Over the Counter Trading
Instant connection to all world markets
Trading person to person through a trustnet
Using a similar Ripple design
While bitcoin emphasizes currency creation
I see ripple through a central server being applied towards stock exchanges
By diversifying servers and having assets trusted through multiple exchanges
It may be able to evolve the very core idea of stock exchanges.
Just means someone needs to remake the protocol where no foundation holds half the XRP Been pondering how to apply a ripple design but redo it without it being bitcoin
It's pretty easy, just allow submitters of proof-of-work to create XRP, and adjust the difficulty so that the number of solved proofs per ledger is below a threshold.
Proof of work could go like this:
1) Put the hash of the previous ledger into a SHA256 hashing context
2) Put a nonce into the hashing context
3) Hash the result.
4) If it is greater than the target difficulty, increment the nonce and go to 1
If you don't find a solution before the next ledger close then you start over with the closed ledger's hash.
Now if you do find a solution then you submit it to the network as a special transaction. Very likely, a few other people will also find solutions. To break the tie, the consensus process could pick the solution with the lowest value.
If the difficulty is too low then there will be many solutions per ledger. To prevent proof of work from flooding the network, the algorithm for adjusting the difficulty would increase the difficulty until the number of valid submitted proofs per ledger was below some number, say 200.
At some point you want XRP to stop being created so after some ledger number, say the one hundred millionth ledger, no more proof of work can produce XRP.
I'm no expert at cryptosystems so this rough outline will probably need refinement.
Just means someone needs to remake the protocol where no foundation holds half the XRP
Been pondering how to apply a ripple design but redo it without it being bitcoin
Been pondering how to apply a ripple design but redo it without it being bitcoin
OpenCoin has a monopoly on XRP. Yes, it is their property and they have every right to control it. However, that by definition means it is not a free market, it is a controlled market.
To me this isn't inherently good or bad. Maybe they'll screw all up. But it seems like they've been doing well for themselves thus far. So I can respect that at least.
OpenCoin Inc spent VC money to buy up XRPs on the open markets to get a bigger market cap so they can attract more VC funding. They can't release too much or the price will fall back to the real values (without their own buying).
That's an interesting accusation. Do you have any evidence of this?
What evidence would you need?
Even if they did do that, no one is forcing anyone to buy XRP.
I don't understand why ripple gets everyone panties in a bunch. Bitcoin is not going anywhere. Ripple is not a "scam". It might be a bad idea, or just a failure in general. But it's certainly not a scam. And anyone who goes around posting in giant red text that it's a scam just looks ignorant and immature. (Not directing this at you MPOE in particular, although normally I would expect you to articulate why ripple is worse than Hitler as opposed just throwing around ad hominems)
Incorrect. OpenCoin has complete control over the price by having complete control over the supply.
The market takes that into account. It's still a free market in the bigger picture. Opencoin can not control whether or not people purchase XRP. As of now the free market has assigned a value of around 50 XRP per usd.
When you unilaterally control supply, there is no free market. If OpenCoin were to dump 30 billion XRP on the market tomorrow, do you think the value would still be 50 XRP/USD? Obviously not. Until the majority of the XRP is distributed, market demand is in the hands of OpenCoin.
Opencoin is a company. Not a government. XRPs are their property. No one is forcing anyone to do anything here.
Anyone who purchases XRP knows exactly what the situation is. (I have not purchased any XRP fwiw)
That goes without saying but it isn't a free market. You're confusing freedom with free market, they are not the same.
Quote
A free market is a market structure in which the distribution and costs of goods and services, along with the structure and hierarchy between capital and consumer goods, are coordinated by supply and demand unhindered by external regulation or control by government or monopolies.
OpenCoin has a monopoly on XRP. Yes, it is their property and they have every right to control it. However, that by definition means it is not a free market, it is a controlled market.
OpenCoin Inc spent VC money to buy up XRPs on the open markets to get a bigger market cap so they can attract more VC funding. They can't release too much or the price will fall back to the real values (without their own buying).
That's an interesting accusation. Do you have any evidence of this?
What evidence would you need?
Is the "if you can't beat'em, join'em" approach of the Ripple network with regard to financial institutions and the law a necessary step for the future of cryptocurrency?
This is not the approach of Ripple. The approach of Ripple is pump-and-dump. Stop trying to muddy it, not gonna fly. There's no relation between Ripple on one hand and finance, financial institutions, innovation, Bitcoin, the future, cryptocurrencies etc.
If I'm shilling, then I'm shilling for the technological advancement of the human race, and the enrichment of the entire cryptocurrency community.
Right, because if you were shilling for fiddy bucks you'd be saying "If I'm shilling, it's for fiddy bux". Totally, I can see it.
Incorrect. OpenCoin has complete control over the price by having complete control over the supply.
The market takes that into account. It's still a free market in the bigger picture. Opencoin can not control whether or not people purchase XRP. As of now the free market has assigned a value of around 50 XRP per usd.
When you unilaterally control supply, there is no free market. If OpenCoin were to dump 30 billion XRP on the market tomorrow, do you think the value would still be 50 XRP/USD? Obviously not. Until the majority of the XRP is distributed, market demand is in the hands of OpenCoin.
Opencoin is a company. Not a government. XRPs are their property. No one is forcing anyone to do anything here.
Anyone who purchases XRP knows exactly what the situation is. (I have not purchased any XRP fwiw)
Until the majority of the XRP is distributed, market demand is in the hands of OpenCoin.
You mean market supply is in the hands of OpenCoin. Market demand is in the hands of...the market.
Incorrect. OpenCoin has complete control over the price by having complete control over the supply.
The market takes that into account. It's still a free market in the bigger picture. Opencoin can not control whether or not people purchase XRP. As of now the free market has assigned a value of around 50 XRP per usd.
When you unilaterally control supply, there is no free market. If OpenCoin were to dump 30 billion XRP on the market tomorrow, do you think the value would still be 50 XRP/USD? Obviously not. Until the majority of the XRP is distributed, market demand is in the hands of OpenCoin.
Is the "if you can't beat'em, join'em" approach of the Ripple network with regard to financial institutions and the law a necessary step for the future of cryptocurrency?
We do need a solution that can quickly scale to meet the needs of the global transactional currency market. This is part of why I support Ripple.
BTW I can't figure out how expressing my opinion on the state of the payment space makes me a shill? I have no involvement with any companies at all (aside from my own totally unrelated small business).
###
I believe Satoshi intended for Bitcoin to operate outside the laws of the state, eventually forcing laws to be reshaped around it.
Today, the Bitcoin Foundation and Co. are already hustling to regulate everything quickly. Why? Because they perceive it to be in their own personal best interest. They need Satoshi to come back and slap them upside the head.
I think Bitcoin is winning so long as it remains as I propose Satoshi intended it to be. If it tries to "regulate itself" it will regulate itself into oblivion just as the real world hits a tipping point of math-based currency adoption.
If I'm shilling, then I'm shilling for the technological advancement of the human race, and the enrichment of the entire cryptocurrency community.
We do need a solution that can quickly scale to meet the needs of the global transactional currency market. This is part of why I support Ripple.
BTW I can't figure out how expressing my opinion on the state of the payment space makes me a shill? I have no involvement with any companies at all (aside from my own totally unrelated small business).
###
I believe Satoshi intended for Bitcoin to operate outside the laws of the state, eventually forcing laws to be reshaped around it.
Today, the Bitcoin Foundation and Co. are already hustling to regulate everything quickly. Why? Because they perceive it to be in their own personal best interest. They need Satoshi to come back and slap them upside the head.
I think Bitcoin is winning so long as it remains as I propose Satoshi intended it to be. If it tries to "regulate itself" it will regulate itself into oblivion just as the real world hits a tipping point of math-based currency adoption.
If I'm shilling, then I'm shilling for the technological advancement of the human race, and the enrichment of the entire cryptocurrency community.
OpenCoin Inc spent VC money to buy up XRPs on the open markets to get a bigger market cap so they can attract more VC funding. They can't release too much or the price will fall back to the real values (without their own buying).
That's an interesting accusation. Do you have any evidence of this?
Doesn't matter, no one is forced to accept XRP.
OpenCoin Inc spent VC money to buy up XRPs on the open markets to get a bigger market cap so they can attract more VC funding. They can't release too much or the price will fall back to the real values (without their own buying).
We're talking about a currency here, not soft drinks. Central banks have complete control over the supply of fiat currency, Satoshi does not.
Coca Cola also has control over the complete supply of its products.
We're talking about a currency here, not soft drinks. Central banks have complete control over the supply of fiat currency, Satoshi does not.
Coca Cola also has control over the complete supply of its products.
Incorrect. OpenCoin has complete control over the price by having complete control over the supply.
The market takes that into account. It's still a free market in the bigger picture. Opencoin can not control whether or not people purchase XRP. As of now the free market has assigned a value of around 50 XRP per usd.
Opencoin is a service provider. And ripple is the service. XRPs are a part of that service and people deem that they currently have value. That value is partly based upon the market deeming that Opencoin is both trustworthy and capable. Whether that is actually true or not remains to be seen.
...I believe they think that being valued over Bitcoin market cap is a fair price, or that they think they must maintain it to continue generating profits selling their coins.
Note that OpenCoin can't force anyone to buy XRP. The price is set purely through free market forces.
Yeah yeah, neither did Pirate force anybody. He just used idiots to shill it all to fuck.
Quote
Affinity fraud includes investment frauds that prey upon members of identifiable groups, such as religious or ethnic communities, language minorities, the elderly, or professional groups. The fraudsters who promote affinity scams frequently are -- or pretend to be -- members of the group. They often enlist respected community or religious leaders from within the group to spread the word about the scheme, by convincing those people that a fraudulent investment is legitimate and worthwhile. Many times, those leaders become unwitting victims of the fraudster's ruse.
We were talking about the need for UNLs and consensus, which make Ripple servers totally dependent on a configured list of trusted nodes to fend off sybil attacks. Since XRP is just a unit of quantity that is being tracked on this weakened transactional system, how could you possibly call it an improvement? In addition, they decided to use a centralized model for distribution of XRP. How is that a step forward? Ripple transactions are dependent on the very weaknesses that Bitcoin was designed to overcome and ripple distribution is completely contrary to the goals of Bitcoin.
After all the XRP have been distributed or sold, the situation for Ripple is no different than that of Bitcoin after every coin has been mined. It just happens on a different timescale. It does not affect the properties of the cryptocurrency, only its distribution. The distribution method does not change the usefulness in serving as a medium of exchange used in commerce, other than having a different volatility profile (which the market can mitigate, i.e. bitpay).
It is an open question whether or not the Ripple consensus model is "weakend." The Ripple developers claim that their method is rigorous and is guaranteed to work correctly when the total number of participating nodes exceeds a relatively small threshold. On the other hand, there is no peer reviewed research paper that "proves" the claim. And Ripple is currently closed source so there's no realistic way to audit this method.
Whether or not Ripple is an improvement upon Bitcoin remains to be seen - it is an unproven statement. It could go in either direction at this point. If, however, the consensus model proves to be workable and correct then it will be clear that Ripple performs many additional useful functions beyond Bitcoin.
If the consensus model turns out to have a fatal weakness, it would be a disaster and Ripple will die on the vine.
Jump to: