Topic: Why Ripple™ is against everything Bitcoin - page 4. (Read 45626 times)

Extremely well put - that's it. Let's be serious: a couple of months ago everybody who asked got 50,000 XRP. Now those 50,0000 XRP = $1,000. That's a JOKE. And there are another XRP100B in the hands of OpenCoin, waiting to be "given away".

Mrbigg: what do you plan to do with your Ripples?

I have to agree that it is not cool to lie in that way. Funny how I never read things in that exact way, I always thought it was going to be Open Sourced, eventually. Obviously I've been directed to where they blatantly state it already is, point taken.

Decentralized I still think it is. Decentralized as in no central point of failure. As in consensus based transaction processing where OpenCoin by itself will not be able to change the outcome of a ledger. As in a decentralized processing system. Now, if decentralized is supposed to refer to the coding decisions and effort, then I guess you are right, at least for the moment.

But does all that mean it is less of a system, and will have less of an impact or usefulness? Not for me, it won't. Ripple and Bitcoin are two completely different beasts, complimentary if I understand things correctly, and I intend to see this thing through. If it fails, we all get scammed or robbed, well, no lesson is too expensive if you learn it.

True, and in addition they must operate under the worst-case assumption that the government will try to shut them down. They need a distributed mechanism to deal with that eventuality, even if it never materialises. In fact, the presence of this signaling mechanism might even cause governments not to bother.

Ripple absolutely must become fully open source for it to have any hope of success. I wouldn't put my money in it unless I knew it was going to be open source. And one of the developers recently admitted in the forum that they made a condition of their employment a clause in the contract that the source code will be published as open source.

Software that claims to be a decentralized payment system can't stay closed and have any legitimacy. These guys have said repeatedly that the sources will be opened. I've met them, and they seem quite knowledgable and trustworthy.

But here's why I get the feeling that TradeFortress et. al. have the retard gene. It should be clear that OpenCoin could never dump their entire holdings of XRP as long as the software is closed source. So if we are to believe that Ripple is a scam, then the only logical way to achieve the maximum return is to first publish the source code to the Ripple system and then unload XRPs for as much money as possible.

Knowing this, anyone who claims that OpenCoin plans to dump XRP without opening the source code is not arguing in good faith.

Shouldn't that be better from your perspective?


Everybody who holds BTC has a motive to hold it themselves and to encourage others to spend and accept it. I don't see how this is better or worse than XRP, just different.


To use them to exchange between BTC and EUR. Maybe hold some if the code is released and the whole thing takes off.

selling?  they've given away over half the initial issuance in a non random way and iirc Larson said they're going to give away another few billion.

all these giveaways, if anything, are going to encourage hoarding by the recipients, much like a lottery ticket.  this is fundamentally different from Bitcoin where miners had to work for their mined coins and need to sell enough coins (circulate) to cover costs.  this encourages development of the Bitcoin network and economy.

what do you plan to do with your Ripples?

To be frank, most people don't really care if a service is open source or not.   We never request to view the source of Paypal, or Visa or Mastercard payment system before using them.

If Ripple indeed has come out with good solution to solve a particular set of problems in the payment network ecosystem, people will embrace it as well without caring if it is really open source or not.

Heck, go ahead and even pull a MLM/Ponzi and scam the retards.  

Just don't lie to the community that the project is Open Source and Decentralized, when it clearly isn't now.

 

XRP can go up in value but fees can stay low, because the transaction fee can be changed through the consensus process. OpenCoin already lowered the fees because XRP went up in value unexpectedly and they want to keep the transaction costs low so that everyone can use the system. In the future, the lowering of fees will happen through the consensus process explained in the wiki (right now there aren't enough validators participating in the consensus process for this to happen).

OpenCoin has already explained how they plan to make money, "We hold XRPs and hope they go up in value."

Facts:

1. XRP is a currency
2. XRPs serve a central, useful function in the Ripple system
3. Transaction fees, paid in XRPs, can be lowered or changed through consensus
4. OpenCoin controls the distribution of XRP
5. OpenCoin plans to make money by holding and selling XRP
6. Ripple server is closed source but will be open sourced soon

Now that I've explained the facts yet again, there should be no need to repeat it constantly - these repetitions do not add any value to the conversation.


1. The founders own 20%
2. OpenCoin plans to give away 50% to fund new accounts and spur adoption
3. OpenCoin will sell the remaining 30% to finance operations and repay investors

Note that the fees don't go to OpenCoin.

Through selling the 80% of all XRP and through appreciation of their own 20% of all XRP.

I'm not saying you have to, but many of the claims floating around this thread are based on the absence of source code. The code isn't open source yet, there's no misunderstanding there, but it is available to many outside OpenCoin, and the network is currently supported at least partially by the gateway and indie devs, so OpenCoin does not really have the option of changing the rules and have that go unnoticed.

If looking at the source code would satisfy some of people's doubts then I'd say that's a small price to pay, requesting access to it, instead of bitching about how it is completely opaque. Now, the claims of it not being open source are obviously plenty substantiated and that will need to change eventually, but still I find it most people are complaining just for the sake of complaining when there isn't any movement towards getting things straighten out.

My personal bias is that OpenCoin has the right to keep it closed for as long as they wish and only open it selectively until they feel it is ready. Everyone has the option of not using Ripple at all, and even to complain about it as much as they feel needed, but the sum total of these cries isn't going to amount to much technically. Socially, sure, it might scare people off, but it also provides plenty of visibility to Ripple and the right minded people will do their own due diligence before deciding who's right. One thing I can tell you, there has been an enormous effort put into developing ripple and it really feels like the people behind it are amazing and capable, but that's my personal experience, not something I took from what people say around here.

XRP will never run out - the fees can and will be lowered as much as necessary to ensure that transaction costs always reflect the actual costs.

ok, lets play your game. 

let's accept for a moment your assumption (since it's not been proven yet) is correct and the fees stay very low.

how then does OpenCoin make money?

Do you dispute that the fees are so low that the existing supply of XRP would last for thousands of years?

Now you just look like a ripple shill to take attention off of certain points of ripple. Pointing to a FAQ is all you got?

You fail buddy. Lol

i started off this morning listing several factual arguments and laid out an economic reasoning why Ripple is flawed.  that is a fact.

you claim you've answered those arguments but all you did was point me to the wiki which is already known to be a mess by Joel himself.

you are the one failing to present any rational responses.

Why should I?

Is it publicly posted?

How do I know they aren't releasing a previous version even if indie ask for it.

There is a big difference between it being open sourced and gaining access to view the code.

One is exclusive and the other is truly open sourced.

If you are truly promoting Ripple, you should stop posting here to let the thread sink to the bottom. 

All the discussions here won't help in the adoption of Ripple a single bit.

This is what they're telling you. You can't argue against ripple because you can't see it. Bitcoin can be seen. The code can be discussed and critiqued. Even if you don't code you can look at the collective discussions of developers and determine its value. You can't do that with Ripple!

Time and time again, you refuse to come up with actual rational arguments. You can call me a wall as often as you like, but the fact remains that you're not presenting factual arguments. You are arguing against Ripple, the onus is on you to come up with arguments to back up your assertions. That is something you can do unilaterally, so don't blame me if you can't or won't.