Topic: Ripple or Bitcoin - page 48. (Read 34110 times)

I agree to a point with this. IMO, it's deeper than that even.  This is an ideological battle between those who seek to preserve a system based on "anti-trust" (Bitcoin) and a system that is based on "trust" (Ripple). 

I'm betting on Ripple because again, IMO, anti-trust systems are against the laws of nature.  Humanity wants to trust and hates itself when it is forced to accept that the future can only be doom and gloom and everyone and everything is corrupt and untrustworthy.  The greater humanity in their hearts, does not believe this.  In their hearts they have hope and thus will not surrender to a system of anti-trust.  They will instead search for smarter ways to offer trust and I believe Ripple is that system.

Bitcoin has shown us the way.  I believe Ripple can do it better.  Maybe in the future, someone will do it better than Ripple.  In the end it doesn't matter who does it, as long as it gets done.  Regardless, when one bets on the good of the human spirit, in the end, all of humanity comes out a winner.   

It's interesting that the people arguing against ripple are the ones who stand most to lose, their main fear is that other people would choose XRP as speculative investment over Bitcoin.

Another ripple thread in the wrong forum?

Ripple is centralized and closed source. They need to start with that.

This, pretty much.

Get lost, liar.

There's no such thing as a debt to a friend of a friend in Ripple, just debts to friends. And if you merely want to use it as a payment system, for instance because you want to use it as a distributed exchange for buying BTC, rather than for community credit,  then the trust lines will generally be reciprocal and the trust limits will be set to small amounts. Each person would extend the other a small amount of credit to gain reciprocal access to the other's network. Balances would generally even out over time, but could be settled periodically.

excellent point

there are few people who don't ever default on payments. most people have good intentions to pay money back but at the end of the day money is hard to come by and people will always believe they can pay the debt that is to a friend of a friend back later. after all they don't even need to see the person, there is no human connection to make them feel bad about not paying them back. Ripple is a system that would only work people where robots that could not default.

Sadly true.  Had to learn this a while back the hard way

There is no incentive in Bitcoin to run a client. The only incentive is for mining, which doesn't exist in Ripple.

People running clients don't get any compensation in Bitcoin. The Ripple server is analogous to the Bitcoin client.

People will run Ripple servers because they want access to the Ripple network. Otherwise, they'll have to find someone else's server. People who run servers to provide access to the public will expect to provide access to hundreds of low-load clients, not a few high-load gateways, arbitragers, or market makers. The only way to ensure a reliable high-speed path is to run your own server (or pay someone else to do so for you). Then, people won't cut you off because you'll be pulling your weight and cutting you off would mean cutting themselves off.

Once you're running a server that tracks the network, the extra work to validate is negligible. It's just a few crypto operations to sign proposals and validations.

But I do agree that there is a real risk that the network could shrink to a small set of validators. I don't think anyone has any incentive to see that happen and I think everyone who uses the network has an incentive to see that that doesn't happen. We'd like to see a large number of validators around the world run by different groups with different interests, just as we now have a large number of Bitcoin clients running around the world run by different groups with different interests.

But really... Is Ripple going to come down to the user trusting a few servers? One of the primary strengths of bitcoin is that the blockchain encourages competition among nodes and provides an incentive for all participants. Where is the incentive with Ripple? Will it be left up to the big players in Ripple to provide servers in order to keep  the value of the currency going? In that case, how is it decentralized? If there is no mining of blocks, then it sounds like ripple would be unable to provide transaction fees to those running servers... where is the incentive? Nobody is competing for blocks!

This is a very unfortunate truth. And yet if your friend called you up and asked you to help him move some things, you'd probably happily give him $50 worth of your labor. But if he was short $50 to buy groceries, there's really no way to help him, and he'll wind up putting it on a credit card or, worse, using a payday loan.

There are a lot of barriers to lending money to friends. Ripple can knock down a lot of them. For example, you don't have to actually ask your friends to borrow money. You don't have to meet with them in person to pay them back. You can keep track of who borrowed how much and people are cut off automatically when they hit a limit. I honestly don't know if that's enough to make it work. It may or may not be. Social changes will also be needed.

But if that happens, I think it will drastically change the way people think about money for the better. But I don't see it happening any time soon.

Actually, friends are the worst people to lend money to. Money/business relationships should be left to the impersonal.

I don't trust friends with my money because people are always useless with their money management. this is nothing new for the world. even the people running the country's can't get money management right.
Now, why would i trust my money with my friends friends friends friend? come on bro he's a good bloke! lmfao
now why would I trust ripple? There is nothing but shady business tactics going on here. Ripple/open coin employees disguising themselves as bitcoin users to attempt to fool new bitcoin users that the long term bitcoin guys are on board with ripple. Don't get me wrong I opencoin/ripple guys full credit on being able to make a massive amount of money and have huge amount of control, good on you guys if it works your a superpower. (illumanaty)
Ripple is not open source
Ripple is a centralized company (opencoin) easy to kill for governments
Ripple is owned and controlled by a governing body
Ripple can be made to revers transaction by a court order.
Ripple is no easier to use than bitcoin.
Ripple is poluting our bitcoin growth and forums with their propergander.
Ripple is censoring the bitcoin forum from bad experiences with ripple.

What I find funny is that the ripple advocates are trying to convince all of us that ripple is a great alternative/compliment to bitcoin but without any real PROOF.

i.e. source code.

So far it is all talk. And until the source is release it will be all talk.

What do salesmen do? TALK. 

They get paid by OpenCoin Inc?

A few things:

1: bitcoin >>>>>>>>>>>Ripple
2. Ripple may have utility or may be a scam; or both.
3. This thread made me laugh...multiple times   
4. If Ripple proves itself as legit, I will likely adopt as relatively late as I did Bitcoin 02/2013.

Fashionably late and utterly skeptical. 

Maybe someone can clear this up my understanding of ripple for me.

So right now, we have one Ripple server, but the code for that is intended to be released at some point, and then we are supposed to have many ripple servers that all use a protocol in order to come to an agreement on the order of transactions, which is what is supposed to decentralize the network and make it more robust? But where is the motivation for any large number of people to run these servers? Of course, in bitcoin the motivation comes from the rewards for each block, but how does Ripple encourage many people to participate in running these servers?

Hey, I'm not the one who lent Patrick money at usurious rates knowing that he was going to use the money in a business that was doomed to fail and then insisted I was doing him a favor. I'm the one who pointed the finger at you for that bit of stupidity.