Topic: Waves vs Ripple - page 4. (Read 4964 times)

From what I see, not a single Satoshi has been moved out of the escrow address, meaning they are still not using the huge funds they now have access to.
Waves team may be behind schedule, but it does not mean the project is bad, Lisk had several delays and was first announced at the end of April. I think Ethereum too had similar delays.
You can not expect a 100x ROI in the first day of trading, it takes time to reach those hights.

At the moment

Waves = centralized

Full node code is closed sourced. Only full nodes being run by the Waves team right now. And what makes matters worse, is that the terms of the escrow have been met; so they are already withdrawing funds from the escrow address.
People who bought into this should be concerned, since we are entirely at the mercy of the Waves team. They can withdraw all of their funds and close up shop, if they should so desire.

lol 

Ripple = centralized

nough said.

both are trash, one is trash because too much supply the other shitty ico

Waves fiat functionalities will be most important for me, if it delivers it will rocket through Ripple.

Why make Ripples if you can make Waves?

Ripple is crap man. Like all the corporate "crypto currencies"

~CfA~

Nope.
https://validators.ripple.com/
It is not really possible to see which of these are trusting which other node, your scenario however is very likely currently (5 Ripple Inc. validators only trusting each other and others having to either follow them or completely fork away).


Nope, this is only possible with a validly signed transaction. If something is changed without a validly signed transaction, there would be proof of that. Please give this proof, otherwise this is like the theoretic possibility that more than 21 million BTC could exist, since the protocol might be hardforked in the future.


Every ledger state has a reference to the previous state hash and all transactions that have to be applied to the previous state to reach the current state (including root hashes of a derived trie structure of them). You can know you added them up correctly if the root hash is correct.


Freezing only works for trust lines, not accounts and is carried out by users of the ledger (e.g. gateways), not Ripple Inc. KYC is not part of the protocol, there is only a possible way to enforce it (you can supply a list of who is allowed to hold things you issue on the ledger instead of allowing anyone to own balances of your IOU).

I don't get what you mean by "feature to correct divergent ledgers" - got any more info on that?



XRP is as much a decentralized cryptocurrency as paypal is. Ripple on the other hand is a decentralized marketplace and settlement platform running as a blockchain with a built-in native centralized cryptocurrency.

Ripple has gained ground: https://www.yahoo.com/tv/york-approves-ripple-labs-application-bitcoin-license-180801684--sector.html
That would be good for Waves

Last I checked, ripple's XRP had 5 validator nodes. All run by ripple. Theoretically it seems possible for non-ripple servers to be a validator node, but that causes a couple of issues for ripple

1. one of the "features" of ripple ledger is that it is possible to at any time for any reason, modify any account's balance, priviledges, etc. this is to protect the women and children. Now if ripple let non-ripple validator nodes into the system, and some of the validator nodes disagreed as to whether a particular ledger edit should not be done, well, seems the balances will diverge. And this is not anything acceptable to ripple corp, so all non-ripple validators will probably have to agree to 100% follow whatever the ripple validating nodes do.

2. The ripple protocol is not a blockchain, but a pure ledger. Now I am not any cryptographer I just write code that uses the crypto functions, but to me it seems that if the ledger is an arbitrary set of balances, then as long as all the validator nodes agree to any particular ledger, then there is no way to know if it all added up correctly.

I remember this was another "feature" as it allowed to correct divergent ledgers due to the non-guaranteed consensus. Of course, maybe there is now a method used by ripple that assures convergence and the need to edit the ledger isnt needed to keep it consistent. But it is still needed to enforce KYC and be able to freeze any account at anytime for any reason deemed valid by ripple.

Also, the business practices of arbitrarily setting the price of XRP, selling it at discount to open market prices to preferred customers, well I guess any entity that owns 80% of a currency is free to do whatever they want, so who am I to complain about this.

ripple is as much a decentralized cryptocurrency as paypal is.

So you cant really make any direct comparison between WAVES and paypal ripple. WAVES is a crypto currency that for now is running just with WAVES servers as it just started mainnet earlier this month. Imminently full nodes will be run by the major exchanges and at that point, it becomes at least a distributed crypto. When anybody can run a full node, then it joins bitcoin as a fully decentralized crypto.

ripple has had years to make this transition, but has refused to do so. Assuming that WAVES transitions to being a fully decentralized crypto, then it becomes the first with fiat gateways built in. There will still be need to rely on gateways to back the fiat equivalents (until somebody comes up with a way to store fiat value in a decentralized way), but the risk from this can be minimized simply by doing small incremental transfers.

Clearly WAVES is worth more than LISK and as soon as the market trusts that WAVES will become fully decentralized, more than ripple.

James

P.S. I am not 100% objective as I have a significant position in WAVES. I also established significant positions in Siafund, SYS, VPN, IOTA, BTCD, SuperNET and various related assets

For me there is just one simple answer ... Ripple full node is basically Ripple so it's fully centralised and if you want to run a full node, it will be impossibly expensive. It has its implication on the core objective of a decentralised currency. Waves cost of running a full node is simply non-existent and a lot of people would be doing that. If the measure of decentralisation is a key parameter Ripple is way way way behind Waves and is designed to be like that so the control remains in the hand of a few.

waves for sure

"will cancer overtake syphillis? "

Great thread, op

agreed

Waves gonna rock the trading scene.   

Really? Wow, that's better than I thought. Do you have anything from the waves team that says something like that? Thanks.

In regards to Ripple XRP ask yourselfs why a coin that has so much good news with banks getting on board and all kinds is still in the dumps Very Few people TRUST Ripple, without Trust, coin is dead.

Look at some of the Fines Ripple has had to pay for being "shady" http://www.coindesk.com/fincen-fines-ripple-labs-700000-bank-secrecy-act/


NOW

Waves on the other hand, is more open and more attractive to companies, clearly we see this with the partnership with Mycelium, that many rate as the #1 bitcoin wallet / app.

In a nutshell XRP is Junk

Waves is Golden.

Can you make a comparison, preferably in bullet-points , on how the two are different?  It would also be nice to know how they are the same in some aspects and how one is better than the other in some features.

It's really hard to give an answer if I do not exactly know what Waves is.

The Wavesplatform is a platform – an exchange-platform like Nasdaq, NYSE, Chicago Merk, OSE, Amsterdam and others – it seek to list real stocks, real bonds, project-shares, cryptocoins – anything that people trade, and it is a big big thing!