Topic: Why don't the exchanges get together and fork Ripple and use it. (Read 1877 times)

what scares me is they may get Banks doors open via Bribery..
Say for example they convince some random bank to use Ripple and in turn they will donate millions of Ripples..
ugggh scary

I hadn't heard about that, thanks, I will read up on it...

...First thing I saw was this:


which doesn't bode well, but I'll keep reading

...which they haven't yet used, even in cases where it would have been much cheaper and faster to do so (e.g. Jed McCaleb's threat to sell off his founder's share or the recent sale of 1 million USD worth of XRP by him or one of his relatives) or where people clearly were defrauded on Ripple. I get the argument though and still hope that their decentralization project at https://rippletest.net/ takes off.

You can't use ripple for this, ripple labs has too much control.

DoS with cryptographic proof that you are being attacked though. I agree however, these numbers might need to be tweaked depending on requirements. Back on topic I still don't see how a fork would give exchanges anything else than a larger amount of (worthless) native tokens but a LOT of additional infrastructure to maintain.

For the costs of a few full rippled nodes alone (as a comparison: Ripple has about the same amount of tx/s as Bitcoin right now with no arbitrary blocksize limitations, requires more than 1 TB of SSD space if you want full history and won't even compile on something with less than 8 GB RAM) you can buy a LOT of XRP. Add to this people to maintain the infrastructure, handle issues...

No consensus is essentially a DOS - 20% is too low a threshold for a trustless environment like the altcoin world, IMO.

20% to block, 80% to get something conflicting in. Everything in between will vote "no" on both transactions since consensus won't be reached.

So yes, if there are 20%+ colluding, you have a problem. If 80%+ are colluding, you have a REAL problem.


Ripple is mainly a distributed exchange, not a "coin".

why ?

what would be the difference between any other premined / IPO coin ?

ripple is garbage I don't get it..

I don't think that is correct. That 80% number you're referring to is the amount of agreement that nodes in the UNL must have before a given transaction is approved, not the amount of collusion the network is resistant to, which is a different metric.

Ah good point, thanks monsterer. Maybe that will be possible in the future.

Ah, we were talking about the same thing in different ways:

Yes, if more than 20% of your UNL colludes against you, you'll see that there is something fishy going on and your node will stop validating. Only if 80+% of these nodes collude can they force an actual "bad" transaction upon you though sompared to 50+% of hashing power in PoW or 50+% of current staking equity in PoS.

Ripple is designed to be a auto-bridging network between liquidity providers. It will find you the best deal for your given order requirements, crossing several different liquidity providers in one atomic transaction, if that is the path of the best deal.

Bitshares has IOUs, and it has gateways, but it doesn't have the glue which joins them together in a seamless manor.

Not trying to jack your thread, but you asked for our thoughts. What can Ripple network do that bitshares is incapable of? Why must it be a fork of Ripple, if you can achieve the same end result of creating a gateway network between exchanges in a system that is more decentralized? Genuinely curious.

https://ripple.com/files/ripple_consensus_whitepaper.pdf



edit: I'm not saying this is bad per se, it is appropriate for ripple labs to be happy with this, because they work with the banking industry which is highly trust based already, but for altcoins, which are largely trustless, we need a different way.

Quoting Sukrim's last post below to avoid the topic getting sidetracked...

Please be on topic.  We aren't talking about Bitshares.

This. BitShares enables KYC/AML compliance for User-Issued Assets (UIAs -> IOUs), and when Exchanges becomes Gateways, liquidity on the decentralized exchange for bitAssets like bitUSD, bitCNY and bitGOLD will go through the roof as a counterparty-risk-free safe haven that grants users who want fiat, derivatives, stocks, etc. all the benefits of crypto.

1) I know they are destroyed, you need to own them before you can destroy them though. Customers of these exchanges will also want forkXRP to operate their own accounts, who should pay them? What if 5 exchanges start this project, get 20 billion forkXRP each and then a 6th one wants to join?

2) How do you ensure that this is really the case and some exchanges are not just claiming to have everybody on their UNL but are secretly forming a network that will kick your validator off?

Ripple's Consensus is 79.9...% collusion proof according to their technical whitepaper. if you have different claims, please write a more formal mathematical explanation.

Proof of Stake only works if the thing that is "at stake" is well distributed...

I think in general this is a good idea - what I would do would be this:

* fork ripple (new base currency, not XRP, obviously)
* change the consensus mechanism to POS, because it's currently trust based and only 20% collusion attack proof
* use this new version of ripple as a mechanism for altcoin only distributed exchange, no fiat allowed

Here is the major part:

* build a generic gateway node that liquidity providers (exchanges, interested 3rd parties) could sign up to run one of

That last part means you don't have to wait for altcoin exchanges to integrate with you, you can get running right away and when they are ready, they can join.

A fair amount of work, but probably a lot less than a project like B/C exchange.

edit: here is an answer to the question in the subject - they don't do this because the amount of work required exceeds the benefit they will get from doing so. You will need a 3rd party to do the majority of the work to reduce their costs of integrating.

There are already few ripple forks, One chinese one gained the most traction but none will succeed without the kind of pull Ripple Labs has. They will be tuna against big sharks at Ripple Labs. For starters they own at least $500 million worth of "NON public" XRP. and, (it's speculated) a large portion of the "public" XRP too able to be used as bargaining chips with big banks and for other lobbying efforts. Prosper CEO is not coming to a community ripple fork because there is no money to be made.

Everyone using ripple gateways in past few days has received an email. in short: You can no longer access or use Ripple after August 30 2015 without submitting passports, licenses, address and other such information.  In fact the process seems more stringent than some banks. I guess after the trouble they faced for non performing adequate KYC is forcing them to crack down hard on users.  Funds can be frozen should users not be forthcoming with this information.

The same thing will occur to any quasi-centralized (as it will be) ripple gateway system where there is a legal pressure to identify actors and "operators". It doesn't matter if it comes through gateway endpoints or what, at some point it will happen, And through such a system you would identify every user of every exchange at once and in real time, unlike now where each exchange will begin to ask for this documentation as they mature. Therefore it may be more appropriate to use another solution: tether to move USD through exchange, although not exactly the same model already fulfills that goal of allowing exchanges to transfer value between each other like crypto. Community could alternatively fork Hyperledger to the same end.

Or there is also Symbiont, which interfaces Bitcoin or XCP Bitcoin assets or even XRP assets with ripple or ripple style ledgers. To transfer USD directly on the blockchain between participating exchanges without even touching ripple would certainly be possible, if required assets like JPY, EUR, CNY could in theory bounce between the two ledgers and back to exchanges.

Users can "Store" their fiat IOUS on the blockchain and even directly trade that fiat (bitfinexUSD, CircleUSD BtceRUB etc) p2p directly on the BITCOIN blockchain just using the Counterparty DEX or the ripple chain also by using symbiont without a central actor involvement until it came to redemption of the fiat. I think this is the obvious best approach. only needs a few trusted fiat issuers for backing this is exactly the model suggested above with the bitshares DEX except the bitshares DEX has a comparitively cumbersome approach and few major flaws when it comes to merging onto bitcoin chain

In due time both will be bridged in some ways with national market systems (NMS), ATS, ECN's and other liquidity pools or FX app like Metatrader. although pairs would likely be restricted.