Bitcoin Forum

Most of the transactions we currently do in the financial realm of our lives rely on trust based systems.

Bitcoin, brilliant in design, sidesteps the need for most of this trust.

Bitcoin is a sort of digital gold with a built in transaction system.  Awesome and very useful.

Bitcoin's base value comes from fanboys, folks willing to take a stand for their monetary ideology, but most importantly its usefulness in transactions that can't be done online for legal reasons or when a person would prefer not to reveal their identity.  Due to this base value, it has attracted speculators who have driven up its price way beyond its value based on its base uses.

That said, in every day transactions, is it useful or practical for people to exchange their dollars (or other currency), pay 4% to move it to Bitinstant so they can get it into MTGOX, so that they can buy some Bitcoin (another 1/2 % fee), so that they can buy a pizza at their corner store?    I'm going to go out on a limb and say "no."

This is the MAIN problem with Bitcoin.  It is not useful as a transaction system to purchase every day items and does not fit well into the current system.   Would you exchange your dollars for euros to buy a pizza in the USA?   Then why would you do that with Bitcoin?  You wouldn't unless you already had a bunch of Bitcoin or you were living your ideology.

Ripple on the other hand, is first and foremost a PAYMENT AND TRANSACTION SYSTEM.   It can handle trust based transactions that people currently use and will therefore be readily accepted into everyday use (unlike Bitcoin).

So where does XRP and ripples (the currency in Ripple) fit in this equation?

I'm guessing but...

Opencoin, Inc., is smart in that they have printed up the currency in their instance of the pre-open source server almost like a stock issue. They have a certain number of shares that they are banking will increase in value, since xrp is the Bitcoin/gold in the Ripple system. They can hand out these "shares" like an IPO without the usual regulatory rigmorole and without having banks in between each transaction. Ingenious in my opinion. However, as mainly a transaction system, the value of the xrp will only increase and be worth something if Opencoin Inc. gains an early mover advantage in the market with their version of Ripple.

Anyone can make a Facebook clone even though Facebook isn't open source. The software isn't what makes Facebook worth something. It's the network of people and the infrastructure possible because of it. I think Opencoin is attempting to reach the critical mass needed to make sure that their instance of the server is looked at more favorably because of the network adoption vs. a clone.

If they succeed then their xrp will be worth quite a bit, in my opinion. If they don't they can still make money consulting with people running or implementing the software. The former would be preferable I would think.

So Ripple is taking the exact opposite approach of Bitcoin to gain adoption of xrp.   Bitcoin people have to convince others to use Bitcoin in situations where they would normally use their regular currency.   Ripple will merely need to get people to use their payment network for currencies they are already used to (by partnering with banks and other financial services) and xrp will become valuable as a result of that (it being the only trust-free currency in Ripple).

Opencoin says Ripple is open-source, but there are no sources in public. They should replace all "open" with "close", until that Ripple is scam.

I bet you put a lot of thought into that reply.   :D

How much owners will make is irrelevant to the reality of the situation.   In order for Bitcoin to move into the mainstream it would have to replace current money somehow.  I don't see any foreseeable way for that to happen.  If you do, why don't you let us all in on it?

On the other hand, Ripple has a very smooth way to transition people from their current currencies into using xrp.  

That's a fact, irrelevant of your opinion on whether it's OK if the owner's of Opencoin make tons of money or not.

Bitcoiners are so stuck in the "mining" solution put forth by Satoshi that they can't wrap their head around any other possibility.  Why is that?

Another "brilliant" reply that doesn't address anything I've written about in my original post.  Good job genius.

Sorry if I insulted u. Sometimes it's not very pleasant to face the truth.

You didn't insult me.  You just demonstrated that you either can't read or that even after you do read, you can't understand what I wrote.

Open-source, closed-source.  Who cares?  If someone makes a duplicate of Ripple that starts as open-source, it will still be the fact that it's a PAYMENT SYSTEM FIRST that makes it successful.  That's the point of my post and that's what makes Ripple superior.  But hey, keep knee-jerking with your answers, that always works when some disruptive tech is about to disrupt the thing you're married to.

I thought OP raised some good points.  In addition, as a non-mined system, OpenCoin costs much less to run.  Bitcoin costs $150,000 in electricity per day just to keep it secure.  Less cost for OpenCoin means more profits.

Also, I read that Satoshi could profit enormously from Bitcoin as well.  His share of Bitcoins has been estimated at 1 million coins.  That's not chicken feed.

Finally, by putting a business-like appearance and accountability on their currency, OpenCoin can easily score a better reputation than Bitcoin with the general public, which is not interested in experimental currencies or in buying drugs on Silk Road etc.

Convenient payment systems already exist. There is no need for one more. Ripple has neither ideological purity nor practical innovation. It is doomed to failure. From the perspective of the average user, it is not much different than Dwolla. From the perspective of the cryptocurrency purist, it is a centralized scam. Ripple sucks.

Interesting and an insightful post, thank you.

Replace Ripple with USD and Opencoin with FED.

For me Ripple is a step back to Bankocraty, we'll see the progress ONLY when the sources become public. That's what my 1st reply was about.

And if it's true that Jed McCaleb is Satoshi, then he's about to bump that chicken feed up quite substantially.   ;D

Not one of you has addressed how Bitcoin is going to become a payment system.   Ripple DOES address this FIRST.  xrp will only take off in value once the payment system takes off.

You CAN'T USE BITCOIN until you exchange your regular money to get it.  Why would someone do that to buy a pizza?

Answer this question and let me know how Bitcoin plans on addressing these problems.

Ripple on the other hand DOES address these issues.  

If Bitcoin has something that will address these issues in the near future, I'd be happy to reverse my opinion.  I don't see any answers other than people don't like that Ripple is closed source, they don't like that a company pre-mined 100,000,000,000 of that system's currency, or that they are worried their might not be enough currency to create an account for everyone in the world.  

Are you guys for real?

I'm all about solutions.  Tell me how Bitcoin fixes (or plans to fix) the issues I illustrated in my OP.

 "they are already used to (by partnering with banks and other financial services)"
now I am pretty new to all of this and dont really know what I am talking about. But isnt one of the major things that is great about bitcoin the fact that banks dont have anything to do with it?


here is a link about how the major banks are screwing over the regular joe on a daily basis. Kinda scary.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/everything-is-rigged-the-biggest-financial-scandal-yet-20130425?src=longreads

Its pretty long but well worth the read imo

This automatically disqualifies anything you might have written about that.

You fail to understand why it is vital for an distributed currency to be opensource, and you also fail to understand that if a company states something, he'd better not be lying.

Was that for me ceasar?

+1

The client is open source ... the server is in beta

Ripple and bitcoin solve different problems, ripple is clearing.  Bitcoin is the reserve currency of the internet.

Both are needed.

The jury is out on opencoin's implementation.  

But it's probably the best implementation to date.

That is one of the great things about Bitcoin.  You can be your own bank.  This is useful in the same way it would be useful to have a vault under your house to store gold and a Star Trek transporter to send that gold to whomever you wanted to instantly.   Very useful.

However, as an everyday way of making payments to other people, not very useful (unless you already have tons of them and your friends and vendors have tons of them).   In order to buy a pizza with Bitcoin, I need to find a merchant that accepts Bitcion, and then I need to find a way to get my money to an exchange (at a fee), then buy Bitcoin on that exchange (at a fee).    That's a lot of work and expense to buy a pizza.   Now I might be ideologically inclined to go through that work, but most people won't be.  Most people are going to whip out their debit card and make a payment to the pizza guy with their fiat currency.   That simple.

Whatever the legal tender of the land is, is what people will use, unless their is a reason not to (ie - transactions that are illegal with the legal tender, etc.).  The only way to get a new currency to move with existing currencies is to make the addition of those currencies TRANSPARENT to the majority of the people involved (not the hard-core people like Bitcoiners).   This is what it will take for mass adoption.   To avoid this issue is folly.

+2

LOL... that's fine with me.  ;D

I wish you guys would stop with the circle-jerk and help me understand how Bitcoin plans to become a mainstream currency.

It's not that hard to open source something.  If they say they are going to open-source it, they probably will.  Bitcoin took a couple of years to develop before its release as well.  Just give it some time.

No, OP.

At 100xrp reserve currently, you can make a billion of accounts. And they can lower the reserve again if xrp value continue to raise.

Simple.  Start a pizza business that accepts bitcoins.    Or convince your local establishment.

Or take the lazy route, and order your pizza online but pay with bitspend.net, or similar service.    ;-)

It is only in dreams of bitcoiners. Miners sell bitcoins for real money to pay their bills. Bitcoin fans buy bitcoins for real money to get screwed by day trading. Each cash in or cash out to exchange go through bank.

Bitcoin has many issues, agree. Make Ripple's back-end open-source and it will FTW.

Yeah thats true...

Wrong way round.  With bitcoin you can operate the warehousing function of a bank, but not the more important money creation function.  With ripple you can be your own bank by creating IOUs that are backed by something.  Whether anyone would want to use it is a different matter.  You can *almost* do this in bitcoin, but it's very tricky.  Bitcoin and ripple in theory should be complimentary ... in theory ...

They would need to start a new ledger for this. It is not improbable.

why couldnt there be a new reward on a ledger entry crediting opencoin with a second 100 bn, if they achieved consensus in the unique node list?

You fail to understand that I'm talking about IDEAS and you are talking about particulars.

The entire IDEA of Ripple is a better execution of an alternative currency because it is inclusive of CURRENT currencies and can be used as a payment system for those currencies, and the adoption of the "trust free" currency is secondary.

What about this don't you understand?

OK.  Bank Vault instead of Bank.  Are you happy?   Not sure what your argument is.

Ripple is a distributed payment system involving IOUs (which is exactly what we use now in our daily lives).   If it takes off as a payment system then the only trust-free internal currency (xrp) will be very valuable.  They are using payment system adoption as the route to trust-free currency adoption.  Bitcoin is doing the reverse.

Well said. Everyone focuses on closed source.

To quote an analogy I used before. Ripple is choosing to build the plane before they fly it.

We can play with wording till the end of times. In essence: Ripple is closed-source and this outbalances all its advantages.

That Bitcoin debit cards are not yet available is not a fault of the currency, it just means that nobody has set up a Bitcoin debit card service yet.

It's completely doable.

You are sidestepping the issue.  Having a Bitcoin debit card would still involve people moving USD (or other currencies) into Bitcoin in order to put the Bitcoin on the card.   Why bother?  Just buy the pizza with USD.  Done.

Until this issue addressed, the only people who will be paying with Bitcoin are miners, early adopters, and idealists who already have them.   And yes, you will find vendors that will accept them using services that turn them immediately into their local currency because who would want to turn away business?  And of course, some vendors might want to hold on to some of the BTC for speculative reasons.   However, none of that makes it a mainstream currency or anything close to it.

Mainstream usage will start with a payment system that doesn't interfere with the existing one (or makes things a lot easier).   From there, adoption of alternate currencies will flourish.  That's my view on this.  I'm happy to consider other views though, I just haven't heard any yet.

Why don't you answer these fair questions? 
does it hurt too much to think about things like 'If their page gets down all the ripple system is dead. simple as that.' ?

and besides it does matter that it is closed source, since there is absolutely no proof of security if no-one can review it. that alone sets of the alarm bells over here (*scam* *scam*)

Colored bitcoins would add some Ripple features, but recent update makes it much more difficult to implement.

no one said that ripple isn't solving some practical issues. The problem is just that it introduces a shitload of new problems that you are trying to ignore.

in ripple space xpr is centralized and risk diverted to users. The only point to having centralized gov from a user perspective is to be able to hold gov responsible. In ripple you carry the risk - twofold. Many people dont understand this - therefor I will keep the free x' I got n sell them for an upside reward with zero risk. I like the idea of trust, dislike the idea of putting trust.

there probably wouldn't be a market.
It is just incredibly stupid to lend something in a deflationary currency.  if I had borrowed 1000btc to buy a bicycle 2 years ago then I would now have to work for the next 10 years to pay it back. I sincerely hope no one is that stupid.

Ripple is a closed source scam startup. Anyone who buys into that crap needs their head checked out.

What page are you referring to?

It only matters that it's closed-source if they don't open the source to the public after it's out of Beta like they promised.

But, because you guys can't seem to get your brains off the little details (or even the big details) that are irrelevant to the big picture...

Imagine for a moment that Opencoin keeps their server software closed for YEARS.  That's right YEARS.   And during those years they manage to get all kinds of financial providers to use their system.  They help them create custom front-ends so that it works seamlessly with the current banking system, people have apps on their computers, etc. etc.

Then once a critical mass of adoption as a payment system has been reached, they release the code to the public... and the code reviewers find that XRP is just as secure as Bitcoin.    At that point, does it matter?  I think not.   I think xrp would rapidly become the most valuable virtual currency simply because the payment system ecosystem would make it the most trust-free asset to have within that system.

It doesn't matter if Ripple is the system that makes this happen or some other system.  The important thing is (IMHO), is that PAYMENT SYSTEM adoption must come first and must be inclusive of existing legal tender, and that payment system adoption will lead to better widespread adoption of the virtual currency vs. doing it the way Bitcoin (backwards).  The thing is - all Bitcoiners think that every currency must come up the same way.   That is not the case.

Right now we are all sitting in a calm before the next wave of interest comes. The interest will come in the form of user friendly software that teams of developers around the world are losing countless sleep hours to create. They are trying to make easier ways for business's to accept BTC, safer ways to carry them/ be as accessible as fiat in pocket, as well as simplifying it for the mass market. As i type this million of dollars are being poured into the development of BTC in hopes to be the first in their specific niche. When the the software/hardware/consumer based products go live, that's when you will see rapid adoption. The next wave of interest will be bigger then the last, which was bigger then the last, and so on. The interest will continue to grow at exponential rates, that is unless some unforeseen flaw in BTC is discovered.

issue is still ignored: 'If their page gets down all the ripple system is dead. simple as that.' .

therefore no trust, no one has the ability to improve, so no one will adopt.

(ps, you sound like a car-salesman)

The distribution of the XRP is the main problem. There are no clear rules set, Opencoin Inc. has billions over billions
of them and chooses how to give them away. At least with bitcoin the rules are set in the software.

The first giveaways were receiving up to 50000 XRP, now you get a few thousand if you are lucky.
This is very bad imho and makes the XRP exchange rates artificial high. Why not give out more XRP
to keep that somewhat stable. This also causes other problems, for example people buy XRP now
at super inflated rates thinking it will be Bitcoin 2.0, what if Opencoin starts to give away a few billions
 on Facebook or so. XRP would probably drop pretty good in value and burn some people.

Also I don't like how it is advertised as open, while it is not (yes I know it is in beta blabla, bitcoin is too, so what, I can still look at the code)

Maybe the system should be reset with a fair XRP distribution system and the server opensource from the start, then I would like it :/

How is asking you "What page are you referring to?" ignoring you?   I wish we could have a small IQ test before the system allowed people to respond to prevent this kind of idiocy.

No. Why? Ripple ledger is distributed just like bitcoin blockchain, isn't it?

XRP has a consensus model, not a proof-of-work mining model like Bitcoin that uses mining to distribute the coins.  It would be an interesting problem to somehow combine the two.  If a consensus model distributed coins to miners, that would seem to imply that only those who are part of the consensus would received the mined coins, which would also seem to not be fair.  As a future exercise, it might be interesting to create a coin that allows a consensus to build among any interested parties that still uses the virtue of distributing the coin through mining.

Qubic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112676.0) already combined both.

I don't understand why they don't distribute certain amount of xrp per day automatically to all existing accounts  equally. Sort of reverse demurrage. This would be fair imo.

Ripple is kind of a scam, because OpenCoin owns all the XRP - even if they give away 50% they will be incredible rich if Ripple achieve large-scale adaptation. Bitcoin has for all practical matter the same problem: A very small group owns a large part of the total supply. This is the property for a commodity, not a currency. It is a pity that the great technology behind Bitcoin and Ripple has not yet found its way into an application that is not some kind of a Ponzi scheme.

I understand that we are on a cryptocurrency subforum and so cryptocurrency is the main thing on people's brains, but is it really that hard for you folks to wrap your head around the fact that Ripple is a PAYMENT SYSTEM FIRST?

If it succeeds as a payment system then it its currency will take off and its founders will make a lot of money.   So what?

Its strength is that it that its a distributed payment processing system for existing currencies.  People that want to get into the money moving business can do so without investing millions of dollars in software development and overhead.   This is its strength - moving existing currencies through a distributed payment system that doesn't cost much to implement.

As to not using mining and distribution...

While the scheme of creating "virtual mining" to mimic the difficulty of real mining was not only useful but brilliant, it is not the only way to "skin this cat" as they say, and it really depends on what you want to accomplish.  In this case, as I've mentioned in my original post, they are using xrp as a sort of stock IPO (IMO).   If the payment system takes off, they and all the early people involved in the "IPO" will be rich.  If not, they won't.  

This is not a "currency" launch, it's a payment system launch that has a currency attached to it.  (maybe repeating myself will get this point through)  Getting people to adopt this payment system will involve lots of work that involves a lot more than programming.  

Gtfo with ripple, its so stupid and then claiming it is superior while 80% IS FOR THE GODDAMN DEVS = THEM GETTING FREE MONEY = SCAM.

Nuff said.

can it still be transfered?

I love when muppets parrot the same thing they've seen in 20 other places, without giving any thought to what's been written in the thread they are responding to.

Cue parrot voice:  "Ripple is a scam for devs."  "Ripple is a scam for devs."  "Ripple is a scam for devs."

Go back to reading a LTC thread dumbass, we don't want you to step out of your comfort zone.

With these insults u derail ur own thread.

Ok, so if I want to do a payment or move some money - why should I use Ripple, when I already have Visa and PayPal, and perhaps also bitcoin?

The end user most likely won't be the one to choose this intially.  Most likely you will end up using Ripple because a company is using the system and you'll have a custom app to access it.

I think that Bitcoin users are having a hard time wrapping their head around this, because they are trying to fit the way Bitcoin got adopted to the way Ripple will be adopted and the two will not be the same.

Well, If I actually am the company, why do I use Ripple for my payments rather than the alternatives?

too bad you only have Visa and PayPal in the US.
In Europe many webshops have some online-banking connection to quickly transfer some money. instantly and free.  
(like IDEAL and Giropay). They solve the same issues as Ripple wants to solve, but with more security and protection (by banks, ironically.. ;)

(Paypall and Visa have never been that popular in Europe. personally I refuse to use it.)

... also SEPA (Single European Payment Area) seems to have been designed for all this.

I apologize if someone has pointed this out already, but...OP, you do realize that Bitcoin and Ripple are entirely different virtual transaction utilities, right? Saying one is better than the other is like trying to explain why apples are better than oranges.



Correct, for the most part anyway. Bitcoin was designed as an anonymous P2P system. Anything where a real world identity is unknown or otherwise obfuscated has a greater likelihood for a compromise of trust.


Partially true. Bitcoin (as well as any niche item/product/tool) starts off as entirely "fanboy" based. As the virtual economy grows, and assuming it gathers attention along the way, so does the community around it. Growth in any financial area (whether commodities, currencies, company stock, etc) always attracts speculators...the same applies to Ripple. People are buying and selling XRP for BTC. Not sure if you knew this or not, but this is called speculation.


I'm going to go out on a limb here, but that scenario isn't intended for Bitcoin. However, if you change [a pizza] to [any non-perishable item] and [at their corner store] to [from anywhere in the world, and all anonymously], then I'd say "yes" it is worth it.


I think I have a better system, though it's along the same lines. Hear me out, I promise it's worth while:

What if we had sort of a paper currency..something we could hold in our hands and see with our own eyes? It would have to be distributed though, so I propose some sort of central agency that has all of the currency on reserve, and then from there they distribute it out to various nodes, which in turn come to us. It's an incredible "trust based" system, since trading the currency requires you to have an in-person interaction. In order to keep the currency flowing, we could do favors for each other (like mowing lawns, fixing cars, building computer systems, etc) and we would use this currency to compensate the person doing the work. If we get enough people to jump on this bandwagon, we could create an enormous economy seemingly overnight!


Could be true. I happen to have a few XRP lying around not being used for anything...interested in buying?



I actually cringed when I read this, and I can tell others did as well. I wasn't cringing so much at the statement, but more at the thought of you losing about 90% of any credibility you had  :-\

I should be more clear... these companies will most likely be financial type companies that are involved in money moving already.   Why would they use this?  Low to no cost of implementation and maintenance while simultaneously allowing your customers more services.  There might be other reasons too.   But those would be the top one's I would think.   Through this interface you could send $120 US to someone by sending BTC,  or 300 EU by sending an equivalent in LTC.   If two banks you deal with are on the system you could send your money from one to the other account instantly.   A merchant would be able to accept 100's of currencies if they wanted to without using different merchant providers, you could send $100 from your bank account to your friend in Italy without having the extra step of sending it to a Paypal. etc. etc.  

Sure.  How much do you have and what do want for it?




Yeah, the issue here isn't whether it's open or closed source.  The issue is that the Ripple payment system has a better chance of making alternative currencies (including Bitcoin) more mainstream than Bitcoin does.  However, it's hard to get you guys to think of anything other than the currency side of all this.  That said, Opencoin said they'll be releasing the open source after Ripple comes out of Beta and I imagine if they don't then the project would end up failing.  

This ^^^ and the fact that I use cash all the time too. I never bought the hype about cash being a pain in the ass. I love using cash.

The real problem is that I can get cash back already using various credit cards and debit cards. I know plenty of people who get free flights or other perks from using something other than cash that already exists. Why would they want to switch to "ripple".

Bitcoin has its place for sure and always, but ripples place was filled by Credit in the 80's, and Debit in the 90's. Once you add the perks for these cards and the fact that people are so used to using them you can see why most people will never switch out of what they already have today for most small and quick purchases.

Low cost and easy implementation are sound arguments. But exchange between currencies is really not a problem with credit cards either. It is no problem to do online purchase in a different currency than your own with a credit card. The card company do the exchange for you. (and their exchange rates are not bad)

50,000 XRP on hand ..since it's a revolutionary system and clearly superior to Bitcoin, I'd be willing part with it for a mere BTC500. Should be a steal once XRP takes off.

Naturally I'm willing to negotiate.

I was just giving some end use examples.  These type of things could be done with or without your bank.  Once something is in Ripple you can work with anyone else in Ripple.  So if someone gets in through their bank and I get in through my bank, we can do transactions with each other that don't involve either of our banks.   I could pay you BTC and never have touched a Bitcoin, if that's all you take when we do a transaction (and no banks need to be involved).  This is why I am saying that I think reaching a critical mass of users is important in Opencoin's business plan (my opinion only - I don't have anything to do with Opencoin Inc.) before they release the open source code.   Users are what will make Ripple powerful as a payment system - not the price of xrp (or even xrp at all).

I'll give you BTC4 for the 50,000 XRP.

How many XRP do you need to get to the next level?   :)

Seriously, I was hoping for a retort to my post asking why people would give up free airline tickets and 1% cash back from debit cards. Cards they already have in their wallets.

:)


No retort.  I imagine these things would end up in Ripple too.  Either directly through the card companies or through 3rd parties.   You'd get your airline points or credit card points or whatever (which are essentially another currency), and these could be paid by the company directly into your Ripple account which you could then trade for BTC or do whatever you wanted with them.  I could pay for my pizza in airline points. :)  Seriously.  The merchant would get US dollars (if that's what they sold pizza in) and I could pay with my AA frequent flyer miles.  Can your bank do that?

I think, for exchange of your bitcoins into other currencies. Distributed exchange is built in into ripple.

Ha, way to low ball it. A quick look at the Currency Exchange subforum and I've found 4 threads with better offers.

Seems somebody doesn't have as much faith in Ripple as they claim ;)

I think the hardest part for people when they approach Ripple, is that they are approaching it like a currency start-up (like Bitcoin).   A new Bitcoin-like currency could be released open-source and no specific amount of users would be required to have it be used as a currency (in fact this happens every day on this sub-forum).   However, when you are looking at something as a payment system that includes all currencies then adoption of the payment system is a priority and a requirement for it to be a success.   And until that happens the currency inside that system is essentially worthless (it's only worth right now is speculative and for transaction fees for the small number of Beta testers).

The successful approach to each of these two scenarios is not the same.

There is no way Ripple is better than Bitcoin, I doubt if it will even make a ripple in the crypto-coin market.

It's nothing but a scam from the developers to get noobs to buy into a coin that the devs have a massive stash of which took little effort to mine.

It's the massive mining effort from countless people, that gives Bitcoin it's value.

 

Get off. Ripple is a piece of crap. Why don't you send me your 50,000 XRP and I send you 0.1 of my precious BTC?

I curse you. You are destroying the market :)
 

So how does it work? If I want to transfer 1 BTC to my friend John Doe - do I need to buy some XRP or pay a fee of the transaction?

You clearly don't understand that those XRP can be converted into BTC or USD in about 3 minutes in Ripple.

Take it easy bro. I understand conversion part. Do you understand humor? Why did you offer 4 of your precious BTC for 50,000 crappy XRP if a guy can give them away for free? :)

that is probably because it has been presented as a currency start-up.

I've been doing some reading up and to me it seems like a payment-system (a la paypall) with some internal currency attached to it, which, compared to current banks/payment-methods,  serves no one except the creators.

But anyway, I think there is a much larger problem: in Europe there already are payment systems that are fast, free and secure. However, it turns out to be very difficult to get one system going throughout Europe: every country has their own system (supported by banks that operate in that country). This is simply because it benefits the nations economy; if other countries accept the German system, then German webshops would benefit from that. So.. Spain/Italy have recently launched their own system (mybank). A few years ago IDEAL and Giropay (dutch / german) started to operate for EU, but other countries (banks) simply refused to accept it. It is too political.

So.... even if it works technically, politically it will fail.
Ripple will be born cripple (at least in Europe).

Well of course you have to already have Bitcoin to be able to pay with Bitcoin.  Just like you need to already have XRP to be able to pay with Ripple.

Maybe AFTER you set everything up, XRP is a little more transparent to the user, but setting it up is hardly any less complicated than buying some bitcoin.

One bad thing about ripple is that you need at least a PhD degree to understand how it works. I have one, and I had a hard time figuring this out.

Shortly speaking, if you want to send 1 BTC to your friend, you open your btc client, press "send" button, type your friend's bitcoin address, 3 confirmations, done. Ripple comes into play if you have 1 BTC, and your friend wants Brazilian reals from you.

FF miles would be worth how much. Not $1 each for sure. Would there be a market for trading FF miles. I don't think any airline wants people to dump the miles for cheap. What if a few people bought cheap and had a lifetime of free miles when they normally would have paid 10x more for those flights in USD. See the problems here already?

There is way too much programing and networking and logistics between the companys involved. These players already have sweet deals with each other so why let a new player in the game. It just don't make no sense.

I think the issue of fairness is a huge deal breaker for most people as well. I doubt I would ever buy a ripple because of the distribution system alone. Bitcoin was not 100% fair but I think its a close as we will get and like some one on here just said its the money people have invested in bitcoin mining and the security that it provides that give it staying power.

The demand for ripple may come to a trickle...

Well if you had a BTC account and they did too, you would just send it the normal way.  That's safe and doesn't involve any trusted intermediaries.

Right now there are only a few ways to get into Ripple (gateways).  Bitstamp is one.

So if you wanted to transfer 1 BTC to your friend John Doe who doesn't want to figure out how to get a Bitcoin address...  you could set him up a Ripple account.   You would send some BTC to your Bitstamp account and then withdraw it into Ripple.   Now you can use those BTC for all kinds of transactions.  You could exchange them for XRP, LTC, there is even a guy who issues silver dimes.  And of course you could send 1 BTC to your friend John Doe.  Because there are so few gateways the only downside is that your friend would need to open an account in Bitstamp in order to redeem the Bitcoin in Ripple for a real Bitcoin.   Of course he could use that Bitcoin in Ripple to get some XRP or exchange it for USD or EUR, etc.  

Because there are so few exchanges, this seems like a hassle, and it is for a transaction like this.  This is why I keep saying that in a payment system startup like this, the important things are users and those users will be brought on by existing financial services primarily (in my opinion).   In order to realize the full power of the system a certain critical mass of users and gateways will be necessary.

My bad.  It's been a tough crowd.  :o

Ripple will slow down to a trickle
Soon it will meet the man with the sickle
I call foul like a doubble-dribble
Swiming in the wake of bitcoin like a cripple

I feel bad for the kids who think will tripple
Sucking on the free money tit like a nipple

 ;D

Call me the Forum Freestyler

There would be a market for FF miles.  There most likely will be whether airlines participate or not.  If there is a market in FF miles and I have them, then Ripple will find the best path for me to pay someone in the currency they would like to accept (I can accept or decline to take that path).

As to the programming, I'm pretty sure it's simply a matter of interfacing with Ripple using the API, although that certainly isn't my expertise, so I don't want to say I know for sure how difficult it would be.

I think the "fairness" thing has to do with people thinking there is only one way for a currency to be distributed and the fallacy that "mining" somehow made that fair.   In both cases the original programmers got a big chunk of the original coins.  

Wondering how many ripples OP received in return for this promotion. ;)

This. Ripple may be a brilliant business idea inspired on Bitcoin. But is nowhere as ambitious and truly revolutionary as Bitcoin is.

Bitcoin is really about freedom, Ripple is just a payment system.

Uh... Everybody.  It's one of the key advantages.
Sorry for not addressing your post but this is 100% a dealbreaker.  The only reason ppl are using ripple now is to make a quick buck.

Have you read the entire thread, or did you just find something you didn't like and decided to jump on it?

This has been addressed at least 4 times in this thread.

While you are all focused on crypto-coins, a distributed payment system that can include all crypto-currencies will become king.   It may not be Ripple, but as of now, Ripple has the best shot in my opinion.

You make valid points, but I think you have a hard time arguing with people because your thread title is provocative and incorrect.

Ripple is older than bitcoin, but it was not in focus until now. What changed? Bitcoins came to the world. Bitcoin technology gave ripple developers some ideas. Combination of both technologies lead to progress.

You don't seem to understand that debt equals to slavery. Sometimes it might be a necessary evil. But a system based on credit is rotten at its core.

Bitcoin helps to solve one problem. Ripple, is a problem.

The subject line was more for attention than anything else.   And I love Bitcoin, I've been following since early 2011.   But when I look at all these ALT currencies, I see people trying to solve problems that only concern hard-core users (like should we create a coin that works on older mining equipment), rather than thinking about the long term and what would enable more widespread use.   If Bitcoin is going to be used as an underground currency and a store of value with a built in vault, then fine, it already does that - no improvement necessary.   But the next step in the crypto-currency saga involves distributed payment systems that can be inclusive of current currency.   Ripple is the only candidate I see fitting that bill.

I understand debt just as well as anyone else.  I don't have any.

Bitcoin solves problems of trust, that's for sure, but it won't ever replace or get rid of existing debt based legal tender, if for no other reason than governments collect taxes with legal tender, so you'll have to have some whether you want to or not. You also must accept legal tender in the US for all debts public and private - you can't demand payment in Bitcoin.  This is how they screwed people with gold contracts in the US.  

So, knowing all that, as I'm sure you do, I'm not sure what you're getting at.   Ripple doesn't add anything that doesn't already exist.   What's the difference if you look at your USD balance at your bank website or in the Ripple interface?

Fundamentally no difference - that's the point. Ripple is simply another scamming layer on an deeply rotten system.

This  is a stupidest statement I'v ever heard. If you was born in human society, you are in debt. No matter if you are slave or a king, you are in debt. This is how nature works. Human species live in herd since a birth of humanity. If you want to be free, go live in desert alone, eat peyotes.

You, lucky bustard.

lmfao .. oh man! i have just been waiting for anyone to claim this. and no; i don't believe you speak FOR open coin inc, but its still good to hear someone FINALLY just say it.

furthermore; what kind of a masochist must you be to step into a crypto-community board and argue in favor of, "TRUST US! we PROMISE! we'll do the right thing EVENTUALLY"? this thread made my stomach hurt, but i haven't had a good laugh like that in quite a while.

thanx op
 ;)

Im not one to go to war on an internet forum, but really? Born into debt? There is a documentary about life in Jamaica I saw as a teen that I think was called "Life and Debt". That is real life in debt my friend. That is a situation that is unfair in every way, shape, and form to those born into it. Most people in the US, most of Europe, and developed Asia (most of us with internet access lets say) have the free will to get into legal debt after the age of 18. I know in the US no debt you get before the age of 18 counts because you were a minor and it won't stick as lifetime debt.

I worked through college while 90% of people I knew surfed on loans and their parents money. I did this because I didn't want to pay some odd % every year on money that I never had forever. I saw the long term future goal was worth working harder for today. I worked while they slept. This was my choice alone and I suffered for it, but now I gain in a big way because I paid what I could every month with the money I made as a teen/college student.

Debt can be very close to slavery depending on the conditions. It can actually be the same thing as was the case with the indentured servant concept that was almost as good as slavery after slaves were "freed" in the US. While this is no longer the case in "developed nations" this is very much the case in "3rd world contries" that we have helped to perpetuate into a death spiral of debt in parts of south america, asia, africa, ect.

If we are going to let a large part of the world suffer in unspeakable conditions we should at least be honest with our own privilage to choose to take on debt because we want more than we can afford. We have such a strange capacity to look at our own situations as sooooo bad when people around the world have it 10x worse. I knew a girl that had a fit and cried because the new BMW she got on her 16th birthday had a mismatched "ugly" roof color. Case in point.

This is true. When you borrow some money from your neighbor it is not a slavery. I did this a lot when I was a student. I borrowed from my friends when I needed to survive to next scholarship, and gave loans to my friends when they were in need. Slavery begins when your debt becomes somebody's income.

You are describing ripples business model in your last sentence

No. If I use ripple, I owe noting to Open Coin. The only way they can get your money is if you buy xrp from them.

Taken straight from the description of the various coins in the stick of this forum.

Who cares if it was taken from the description of various coins in the stick of this forum?  It's partially right and partially wrong - the source of the information is irrelevant.

ripples (xrp) ARE designed to be a currency.   ripples (XRP) are different than Ripple.  Ripple is a distributed payment system, ripples are the Bitcoin like currency within the Ripple system.

ripples (xrp) ARE a type of coin.

Someone should edit the thread that you got that from.

Your post betrays your ignorance of simple economics. I recommend a crashcourse; look up Fredrick Bisait, Rothbard, and Mieses.

You've said.... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE.

I have read all of Mises' and Rothbard's books (including Rothbard's long but awesome history of the USA).    Not sure what this has to do with my OP, but that's simply because you haven't made ANY argument at all.   Should you decide to do so, I'd be happy to retort.

Ripple makes me uneasy for a few reasons, chiefly the volume of its currency pre-allocated to its innovators, and the risk associated with its centralization.

I took a stab at identifying a payment layer that could ease the barrier to entry for merchants to accept bitcoin.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=204140.msg2137867#msg2137867 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=204140.msg2137867#msg2137867)

My take is that for Bitcoin to jump to the next level of adoption, tools such as these will need to be designed to reduce friction when trying to initially fund bitcoins, find merchants willing to pay, etc.

Something like this needs to be designed soon, IMHO, or companies will begin inventing their own virtual currencies, much as Amazon most recently announced.

Well then you didn't learn a damn thing, because ripple is a CENTRALIZED CURRENCY.

You still haven't made an argument that has ANYTHING TO DO WITH MY ORIGINAL POST.  You're parroting the same shit you've heard from 10 other people without thinking anything through or actually reading the words. 

Go back to drooling in your fruit loops, idiot.  Don't want you to have to put any effort into thinking through and typing up a reasonable argument or response.

There is no other argument that needs to be made. If you want a centralized currency stick to the USD, and the EURO. The whole idea powerhousing alternate currencies and bitcoins is the fact that they are tied to FREE EXCHANGE AND DECENTRALIZATION. If you still don't understand the strength of these arguments alone triumphing any bullshit centralized system+currency I can break it down further for you.

If you still don't understand that you're responding to shit in your head, rather than my original post, then there is nothing more to say.

If something in my original post relates to something that an Austrian economist said, then quote that part and then explain your argument.   Referring to authors as an argument without making an argument yourself or tying the author's argument to yours is ignorant and is merely an appeal to authority.

Either respond to my OP and not the imaginary dragons in your head, or shut up already.

I will try to answer directly.
Question: 'Why Ripple is Superior to Bitcoin...'
Answer: 'They are superior in lying because they pay 1 million Ripples for each professional scammer which is lying for them.'

 :D.  I think about 80% of the repliers in this thread haven't read past the subject line, another 15% read the first post but still responded as if they didn't and the other 5% actually read and responded.  Maybe this thread IS the IQ test I was looking for. :D

Let me paste the whole quote, that way the people that aren't reading impaired like yourself, can read the entire paragraph rather than just the part that offended your dainty sensibilities...

I hope u don't mind if I promote my project in ur thread...

[ANN] Ripple++ (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=203877.0)

I saw that.  Don't fully understand what you're trying to accomplish, but I'll be following along.  All the best to you.

So, I've been trying my best to learn about bitcoin and ripple lately as I have essentially no experience with either, but the concept intrigues me. I must say it is very difficult to find non-biased commentary and objective analyses in these forums.

I have a few comments and questions about ripple that I would like to add after reading this thread. I'll point out that I still feel I have a pretty poor grasp of how all of this works, so if anyone would like to jump in to correct anything I've said, please feel free.

One thing I'd like to point out is that I don't think we currently have anything like ripple in our economy. There has been a lot of mention of credit cards and debit cards and paypal and centralized currencies, but those are all different from what ripple proposes to be. On the topic of credit cards and debit cards, these are not free forms of payment. Everybody seems to be forgetting that a fee is charged with every transaction. That is how banks and credit card companies make money. And they make A LOT of money (more on that later). And sure you can get cash back or airline miles from using a credit card because the card companies are making so much more money than they are giving back to you in the form of miles. Somebody is paying for those rewards because AMEX isn't in the giving away free flights business last time I checked... The same goes for paypal; it's not free. Sure when I use my debit card or if I pay with my credit card through paypal it doesn't cost me anything, assuming I don't carry a credit card balance. But that is ignoring the bigger picture of how these payment methods are used in our economy. Somebody is paying a fee and the banks are making money.

Here is the part where I may be way off base, so please correct me if I am wrong. There aren't any fees with ripple. There is the small transaction fee that is destroyed, but it is supposed to be a fraction of a percent so as to have no real monetary value. If that is the case then ripple is absolutely different from paying with a credit card, a debit card, or paypal. Merchants would be flocking to this new payment system, meaning OpenCoin doesn't have to do any of the hard work that Discover or AMEX have had to do in order to force merchants to accept their cards as payment. It will happen on its own. The only "hard" part will be getting the general public to adopt it. But as people tend to flock to new technology it seems reasonable to think that there will be many people eager to try it out. Once adoption is widespread, why would anybody use paypal ever again? Why would you want to use a credit card for every day transactions or online transactions (exception noted for rewards, if that is your thing)?

The way I see it, ripple is just electronic cash. But the advantage is has over cash is that it doesn't have borders. Why pay a bank to exchange money when it can be done instantly with no fees? How else can this be accomplished other than with a system like ripple? Sure I can and do buy things from overseas with my credit or debit cards. The exchange rates are "competitive", but I'd rather not have to go through a bank to exchange money. Not to mention there are other fees that are typically associated with overseas purchases on top of what the bank makes from changing money. And I will admit that I have been caught in a situation where I needed cash and had to pay a fee at an ATM from another bank. Again, ripple would alleviate such a problem. In a way, it makes getting or paying with cash easier if you happen to run out.

As for the whole scam thing, I haven't really seen a convincing argument as to how exactly it is a scam. Simply saying that the founders aim to enrich themselves by hoarding XRP doesn't definitively settle the issue. Since there are no fees, why is it unreasonable that the founders of the system have a way to generate revenue? Visa earns billions of dollars a year from its business of skimming money from every transaction and charging ridiculous interest rates for lending money. The mere fact that the developers will be wealthy if the system takes off does not strike me as suspicious or scandalous in any way.

Please note that I am not taking sides here, I'm just trying to understand. Ripple seems like a good idea to me, and I'm having trouble understanding most of the proposed downfalls of the system. Again, I'm still trying to make sense of these types of currencies or payment systems, so if I am mistaken in my assumptions please feel free to add constructive criticism.

1. Bitcoin will always have "fees" too unless it changes its very inefficient coin security model.  It currently costs $150,000 a day just in electricity (not including other costs) to secure Bitcoin.  These costs are being paid by the users and miners of the coin.  Unless the profits of the miners cover their cost of mining, Bitcoin cannot exist.  So Bitcoin will continue to have either mining profits (a form of fee similar to dollar inflation) or transaction fees in the future, which may even exceed those of credit cards.
2. Ripple has less fees becauses it uses a consensus model with a small number of computers to process transactions, so it doesn't consume all the electricity of Bitcoin and can afford to be profitable with very low fees.
3. Ripple is not a scam.  However, it is similar to other coins that have been considered scams, because it is 100% pre-mined.  In the past, coins that were even partly pre-mined were considered scams because the miners thought it was unfair that they are paying for high costs of equipment and electricity to compete against others who already took the best benefits of pre-mining for themselves.  However, Ripple simply uses a different security model that doesn't involve mining, so their reflexively labeling it a scam is not insightful.  They are biased and prejudiced, and too quick to judge based on their other experiences.  Ripple is not a fly-by-night scamcoin, but a serious effort backed by big names and good money.  It is no more a scam than a stock market offering, where the company keeps a lot of stock for themselves while selling off a portion to the general public.  All companies do this.  Ripple is a for-profit enterprise, not a pure community-based coin, but it is not a scam.

Why everybody say that ripples are pre-mined, if there is no mining in ripple? XRPs are just distributed different way than bitcoins. The distribution of xrp is controlled by commercial company, but this is not pre-mining, since nobody is mining. Early adopters get their xrp for free, late adopters will suck need to buy them. 

Pre-mined is easier to say, and people get the idea. Pre-mined also has a tone of unfairness to it that is rightfully deserved in my opinion. Its like you show up at the mine, but someone already has all the gold. They now charge you 1,000x what its cost them to mine and already gave a bunch out to just a few friends. With Ripple, if your not standing wth your hand out on the right street corner at the right time on the right day you don't get the freebe. You become a ripple crony following around the developers begging for a tiny handout and I just don't have the time for games like that.

I agree that their distribution started strange way. I don't think that we need to stand with a hand on the street corner. Let's wait for grand opening and see if they come out with fair way to give away xrp. As far as I understand, the big issue is to prevent people cheating with multiple accounts.

BTW, thank you OP for this thread.  It's a great discussion and relatively balanced opinions. 

Let me sum up the good, bad, and neutral, from my perspective.

Bad:
Close source for the time being
Not enough gateways

Neutral:
OpenCoin is using half of the native currency, XRP, to develop it.  (they needed something to attract investors and talent. Bitcoin couldn't do this)

Good:
Consensus > Proof-of-work.  Read up, it's the best feature.
Use any currency to buy something in any currency
Best payment system to date
Decentralized exchange
Ultra fast transactions; much faster than bitcoin
True microtransactions are possible
Incredibly scalable. No need to worry about the network collapsing under the pressure of the level of transactions Visa does per hour.

The real reason: "They give them away like candy and I don't have to mine them."