Bitcoin Forum

I just came back from San Francisco, I think its time I take ripple seriously...

bitcoin is the true store of wealth. ripple is just the means to swap peoples gateway services value without needing to mess around arbitraging between bank accounts

hm, what's your schedule? anything need help?

Ripple VS Bitcoin?

Are you honestly making that comparison?
There is NOTHING to compare.

Btw what happened to the open source code of Ripple?

It is constantly evolving and actively being developed.

Server (Open source since over half a year): https://github.com/ripple/rippled
Client (Open source since nearly 1 1/2 years): https://github.com/ripple/ripple-client
Other useful bits and pieces (libraries, charting sites, gateway sample code...): https://github.com/ripple

True, Ripple is a TRADING platform, something Bitcoin is not 100% designed to be (which is fine, it doesn't have to be).

i dont think ripple is even worth spending time or thought on
bitcoin is revolution

I don't get the irrational hate people feel for Ripple. To me its more like a company than an alt coin. There are good companies and bad ones. It does not have to be all about world revolution and what not, if the technology serves a purpose ultimately it will be sucessful.

most people are not revolutionaries, we just want life to be more easier and comfortable ;)

Did you seriously just create an alt account to post that?

In time, people will realize the possibilities of Ripple. Most people here can't make decisions for themselves so they swallow whatever crap someone else is feeding them. Classic example; half the people on this forum still think Ripple is closed source or don't understand the difference between Ripple and Ripples.

*Sigh*

here we go again..... another Ripple pumping in process..... when are we done with this crap?

Personally I prefer Bitcoin. Probably because I understand the Bitcoin system better than the trust system of Ripple.
Also there are more business accepting bitcoins. Sure, you can send using a ripple gateway, but that takes time, there's an additional fee and it makes you rely on that the gateways are working.
(I however like Ripple thanks to that massive giveaway they ran about a year ago, but that's because they gave me free money lol :D)

Is it possible that Bitcoins are the store of wealth (gold) whereas Ripples or NXT will be the more commonly used everyday exchanged digital currency?  Just a thought.

Possible, but not likely, since if Ripple takes off, XRP (ripples) will become viable as a store of value too. What does seem likely is that Bitcoin will evolve to support some sort of rippling mechanism. Both Ripple and Bitcoin will also likely adopt innovations from Zerocoin/Zerocash and future alt-coins if they are successful.

Fortunately we can have both. It is not a zero-sum game: one person taking ripple seriously does not imply one fewer person taking bitcoin seriously.

XRP stripped off the fundamental technologies that makes bitcoin actually work. Controlling the value of a XRP is centralized and entirely in someone else hands, and so is the XRP themself.
Neither does it have the incentive to stay decentralized built into it the way bitcoin does.

I will continue to claim this for as long as people think they are comparable.

Then you will continue to show your ignorance.

Sure, they can coexist, and that wouldn't be a bad thing, since consumer choice is a good thing.

what is good about ripple? why would i use it? ???

Depends on where you're coming from. If you're a bitcoin user, its main benefit is as a distributed fiat / crypto exchange system. In the future, given enough adoption, it can also function as a Bitpay + reverse Bitpay system.

The only thing I wanna know about ripple is where can I exchange them for bitcoin.

I got 30,000 I wanna offload

Sell and withdraw through bitstamp.
Another way is to sell on bitstamp for IOU:s and withdraw through this: https://dividendrippler.com

Both Bitstamp and Kraken deal in Ripple and Bitcoin. I believe Kraken is currently having USD withdrawal issues though, so is not a good choice if your fiat is in USD not EUR.

...you have 30k Ripples (XRP), not 30k "Ripple".

What do you want in return?

You can only buy XRP on Bitstamp, you can buy BTC.Bitstamp on Ripple with XRP though and deposit them in your Bitstamp account. They require AML docs for that.

I doubt it, since as I've said there is no way to verify (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=510868.msg5643873#msg5643873) how many ripples there are in existence.

The better system addressing the problem Ripple purports to may be Open Transactions (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teNzIFu5L70), where everything is decentralized and verifiable. Perhaps the Ripple supporters should promote with a community where verification isn't held in such high regard.

Just because you don't understand how something works does not mean it is not possible to do. You can access any ledger with a simple API call and do a sum operation over all XRP yourself if that helps you in your quest of verifying the number of XRP... XRP are as verifiable as BTC and I even told you in the thread you linked how to do that.

Open Transactions is a neat system, true, it still is not in use anywhere besides alpha/beta testing though as far as I've seen.

I asked you how to verify how many ripples exist and you responded with things like:


and


To which I replied:


and


You then responded:


How much value do you really think Bitcoin would have today if the blockchain's genesis block was "unavailable"?

So once and for all, perhaps Sukrim could clarify: if those earlier ledgers from before #32750 ever appeared, could they prove existence of additional ripples, thus making acoindr's point correct that we currently cannot know how many ripples exist?

Or can there absolutely never be any more ripples than are shown to exist in ledger #32750?

Just so we don't have to go through this back and forth ever again, as I feel like this is at least the third time of seeing it for me even in my short history on bitcointalk.

Here - let me put it this way.

If you're an investor and want to get involved in the 2nd most probable "coin" system (misnomer for Ripple, i know) then you can currently drop $5,000 and purchase 500,000 ripple (XRP).

Now wouldn't it be nice if ripple went from $0.01 to .... say .... $1.00 ?

There have been estimates that if the network gets going, and does what its made to do, it would be realistically valued at $5.00 one day.

Just sayin.  500,000 x $5.00 = $2,500,000.

And it doesn't even compete with Bitcoin, so there is no conflict of interest.

Why not take a shot?  I did.

-B-

Disagree, although I admit I had the exact same attitude until about a month ago when I started reading up on it proper.

Strongly agree.

I'm sure Ripple insiders would love that. Remember, you can say the same about any of a number of alt-coins.


What if the price going from $0.01 to $1.00 was the cue for Ripple insiders, which could easily hold 50 Trillion or more XRP, to dump a portion of their new wealth on a now liquid market resulting in a crashed price and loss for all the suckers that bought in at $1.00, thinking it's the next Bitcoin?

Sukrim? Anyone???

Where are the vocal Ripple supporters from earlier in the thread on this question?

This is about the amount held by RippleLabs in their wallets, not the total amount in circulation in the Ripple system. This is like estimating how many BTC are being held by Satoshi. It is about 1 million, give or take, however it is hard to say for sure which address belongs to him. They did not relase a list of addresses that belong to them (which is why I wrote "no further/cryptographically verifiable proof").

Bitcoin operates on a different model (transaction inputs/outputs) and thus needs to be able to track every single coin. Ripple operates on balances, so it does not need full history to work. The situation is not ideal, however as you can see (and verify!) since ledger 32570 the amount of XRP was either stable or has gone down between ledgers, also there is no valid transaction in Ripple to issue new XRP. You can only transfer them or use them as fee (in which case they get destroyed forever).


It would be very unexpected to see that more than 100 billion XRP existed prior to #32570. With current transaction types etc. it is impossible in Ripple to issue more XRP, so the amount in #32570 is the maximum we know about and it is very likely that the total maximum was 100 billion in ledger #0 as advertised (and as any rippled at that time and since then would have produced for a newly bootstrapped system).

It could theoretically be possible that more XRP have existed in these ~2 weeks, however at least at the time of #32570 there were definitely less than that (99999999999.996320 XRP to be exact) in total. SINCE THEN we know exactly how many XRP exist at any point of time, even if for whatever reason another 100 billion XRP existed before and were secretly destroyed before #32570, this does not change the current situation or the future. XRP that are destroyed can not be brought back, so there can absolutely never be more XRP than right now (which is true for every point in time since 1.1.2012).

...Where?! I do not value all XRP at ~500 billion USD... Feel free to buy whatever you want, speculating on XRP however is not much different than speculating on anything else AND you have a company that is determined to hand out still ~ 7 times the amount of XRP that is currently distributed between users.

If you want to use Ripple, buy ~50 XRP or so (0.001 BTC atm.), if you want to speculate beyond that good luck but it's not something that I personally would do or recommend. Ripple's usefulness is far beyond XRP as cryptocurrency, but that's just my opinion of course.

In general, a cryptocurrency do not need to be desentilized to have succes. Bitcoin agenda is to be a desentilized currency. But other coins can have other strategies. I do not think the mainstream market is concerned about desentilisation or not, as long as the currency work.

Where can i sell ripple for fiat

Sukrim, thank you for your apparently honest answers. I would ask people to replace "Ripple" with "Bitcoin" to see how shaky IMO it sounds:

Looks like you can sell ripples for EUR on Kraken. I haven't, but it seems the functionality and order book is there.

Is it at all possible that a transaction type existed before #32570 that could have allowed more XRP to be created, and then that transaction type was removed prior to ledger #32570 being published?

To be fair, you guys are asking me all the time about "theoretically possible", "at all possible" etc. - there are a lot of things "theoretically possible" in Bitcoin too. Yes, it is theoretically possible that this happened (though I cannot think of any reason why it should have and also have not found any evidence for that in any way).

I hate speaking in absolutes when they are not justified (e.g. "there will be 21 million BTC" is provably wrong - there will be for sure less than that because some miners did non issue themselves all 50 BTC in coinbase in the past) so it might sound more sketchy than needed if I were a bit more bold with wording (then I seem to attract trolls again who claim I lie or try to make Ripple look like something it isn't).

The older ledgers were lost because of a software bug by the way, not because of a conspiracy. There is a slow ongoing effort to still recover/reconstruct these old ledgers, so this might very well be just a temporary issue.

Shouldn't this be Ripple vs Ethereum? Ethereum has a stronger development team and wider scope than Ripple. Bitcoin isn't even designed to do the same thing.

This assessment is based on what exactly?

Anyways, I agree: Ethereum, eMunie, NXT, Mastercoin, Colored Coins etc. are the things you should compare to Ripple, Bitcoin is just something that is very well designed to be traded on these platforms.

Stronger development team? Please elaborate.

Like what? That there can be more than 21 million bitcoins without a protocol change?


You're suggesting the common statement there will never be more than 21 million BTC is not justified, and is provably wrong?

I think you just destroyed your credibility. (it's not there will be exactly 21 million BTC, it's there will never be more than 21 million)


So the most important property in dealing with money, namely transparency of supply, experienced a software bug for Ripple?

Centralized platforms remind me of Liberty Reserve.

There has been already a protocol change in Bitcoin to prevent that a few years ago (there was a bug that could issue more BTC than what was intended).

Next time please quote me completely, you missed this part:
I said there will be LESS than 21 million BTC, not more.

When were the dollar bills in your wallet printed? Who originally mined all the inputs in your Bitcoin wallet? I mean, of course it is important to know where stuff comes from, we're talking about ~10 days and a few hundred transactions here though, not about how Ripple works since then.

Me too, that's why I like Ripple, since it is not centralized.

Cool. Can I use Ripple without trusting any Gateways?

Sure.

Can I use it without going through Opencoin?

I guess you mean RippleLabs... yes, the client code is just hosted on ripple.com for convenience, you can run your own rippled to connect to and set up a webserver with the client locally too (it's what I do for example), I linked the repositories before. I'd recommend to use the tagged release versions and not bleeding edge code as it is under active development.

To be fair I, as someone wanting to know more about Ripple, am just asking you simple direct questions in order to never have to go through the back and forth argument I have seen you and acoindr engage in several times on this subject, and your huffy attitude at being asked them just makes me less interested in spending my time in future.

www.ripplescam.org

It seems to me that the market cap of Ripple totally exceeds it's volume:

http://coinmarketcap.com/ (http://coinmarketcap.com/)

Capitalization = $ 815,887,553
Volume = $ 68,099
Ratio = 11980

I have brought this issue up and most people just tell me that I am just stupid or uneducated. Whatever. ::)

But this brings up my #1 rule for investing. Never invest in something I don't understand. I need to understood both the concept & how it fits into the big picture. I feel I understand Ripple, I just can't see it becoming mainstream. And if it did, I can't see how it's value wouldn't be diluted.

Bitcoin has a ratio around 476
Litecoin is just under 100
Dogecoin is around 68

Blackcoin & Zetacoin are running around a 10 and even they have a bigger volume than Ripple. I would trust them long before I would trust Ripple.

My crypto investments are 95% Bitcoin & 5% Dogecoin. I trust Bitcoin because of the huge decentralized network behind it's elegant algorithm. I trust Dogecoin because of it's adoption of a fast confirm time, tiny costs of each unit, the huge community backing it, and the fact that it's inflation rate from mining will drop to about 5% each year at the end of 2014.

I don't trust Ripple.

So if I set up a centralized  webserver as you suggest, the trades will be distributed with the Ripple Labs hosted transactions?

That's my point, that to change the 21 million cap on BTC requires a protocol change.


I personally didn't miss that part. I thought it was obvious having LESS than a capped amount is more beneficial to all holders of the commodity in question. It's having MORE than a perceived capped amount that results in the problem (which is the problem I have with Ripple).



Well, you've got me there. If you want to put Ripple on par with non-transparent Central Bank fiat currency I'll concede that.


It doesn't matter. Stop pretending it does. ALL of the records needed to check all of the bitcoins in existence are available now.



Somehow I get the impression you already know this, but let me spell it out for anyone who doesn't: it only take one unaccounted for transaction to allow for trillions (or more) in unaccounted for currency units, because it's all only data.

Look, you are suggesting that instead of a software bug the first 10 days of Ripple transactions hide something that is not intended in the system, would shatter any kind of trust in RippleLabs as the developers and which would have 0 influence on Ripple whatsoever afterwards. It makes for nice theoretical discussions, the practical implications are however 0.

Proudly presented by: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=67058


The volumes for XRP on coinmarketcap are underreported (they only represent BTC.Bitstamp/XRP afaik.) though compared to other coins they are still low. A good realistic ballpark figure is ~250k USD. I don't know how to fix them "properly" though or how to give a "real" volume, since trading volume is so easy to fake (see Huobi et.al.) and trading on Ripple is so cheap that it would be trivial to fake any kind of volume. I guess it's better to let people do their own research or assume there is not much going on rather than dealing with volume spikes of a few million BTC every now and then once someone decides to have some "fun".

rippled is not a webserver, you would probably deploy ripple-client on a local webserver though. Then tell the client to connect to your local server instead of the official public servers and your local rippled server needs connectivity to other rippled servers of course (just like bitcoind). I am not sure what you mean by "Ripple Labs hosted transactions".

In Bitcoin yes (since it is based on previous outputs of transactions), in Ripple (which is based on balances) this is not true.

The thing about 21 millions was an example that some statements are often simplified ("there will only be 21 million Bitcoins" instead of "there will be at least 12.61 million Bitcoins and up to 20.999... million Bitcoins depending on miners acting economically rational or not") and as you see in this thread it is hard to find a balance.

I meant Ripple Labs generated blockchain, although there isn't a way to validate that independently. As a black box, the Ripple Labs servers just seem to be a clearinghouse of transactions similar to Liberty Reserve.

The bottom line is it's not possible to verify the number of Ripple currency units in existence, in contrast to Bitcoin. You've already expressed as much:


I don't care if the system is based on balances, transactions, or lunar eclipse events. If ordinary people can't mathematically verify for themselves the number of units in existence they should be wary of investing anything into it.

Well, just like with Bitcoin where you kinda need to use the Satoshi generated block chain, you kinda need to use the ledger chain RippleLabs started. You are free to run your own fork of course, but this has similar consequences as with Bitcoin (you'd create an Altcoin with Bitcoin rules or an alt-ledger with Ripple rules). Their validators are widely used, but not the only ones out there, so while they are currently still quite central to the network the network could very well survive without them. You can run your own validator by the way too, some people who are critical of RippleLabs would probably add yours to their UNL to have even more diversity. I might announce my own one "soonish" too, once it has a bit better hardware and runs more stable.

I already told you how to get the total number of XRP at any ledger since 32570, here you go again:
You can increment ledger_index and you'll see that these header form a hashed chain (see the value in parent_hash). If you want to see total balances of all accounts so you can make sure that they add up to the number in the header this is also possible.

I'm not sure how else to explain it, but if you deal with balances it does not matter what happened before a certain point of time, it matters what the state was at a certain point and what happened since then. Any ordinary(?) person with some knwoledge about accounting can tell you that and any ordinary(?) person that is a bit interested in programming and crypto can tell you that this is also verifiable on the ledger chain.

What exactly did you see that made you come to this conclusion?

The ledger chain as you call it is not mined. It is arbitrarily assembled by an algorithm subject to the whims and fancy of Coinlabs, Inc. and/or Ripple Labs. It is not an open source project and it is not even publicly auditable. Again, this centralized ledger is akin to Liberty Reserve which was shut down and the operators were arrested and indicted. It just sounds too risky to get involved with.

How in the world do you figure that?

Actually anything dealing with money involves transactions and balances. That's how any money system works.

You, Sukrim, have a dollar balance. You have a Ripple balance. You have a yen balance, and you have a bitcoin balance. You have balances for other things too which you may not have ever heard of. Now many of your balances may be zero (e.g. your yen balance etc.) but you have a balance, which is the sum of all the units of that currency you have in your possession. Whenever you make a tranasaction, i.e. trade with someone your balance changes.

Now you're trying to say dealing with Ripple balances means it doesn't matter what happened in the system before a point of time? Then how do you know anyone's balance?!? The whole point of any money system is accounting for peoples' balances. People want to increase their balance so they can buy more expensive things (make larger trades).

So within Ripple there must be a way to know all balances (this exists with Bitcoin). Otherwise the system does not allow anyone to mathematically check how many units the system has. As pointed out earlier, that's more akin to central bank fiat. So stop trying to confuse people by pretending there is some meaningful check which can be performed to verify how many ripple units exist in Ripple's system.

I hope that Ripple can become the big actor in china when those centralized exchanges were shutdown by governments, but I'm afraid that their gateway will also be shutdown following such kind of ban, it seems localbitcoins has better future

Which is why every government on earth is corrupt, out of control, and sold your futures to the banking cartel, why you're taxed into bankruptcy, why communism exists in 2014, why bank bailouts destroyed the economies worldwide, why religious superstition and retardation is allowed to reign king over science and education, and why innocent people are plowed over for the wealth of a greedy few.

But hey, enjoy your pizza!

It would be perfect for that because of its support for rippling fiat payments through the trust graph. On the other hand the trust graph also makes it easier to break anonymity. So if Ripple is wildly successful in China, it could help the Chinese government to go after individual users.

Wrong, here's the code (again!): https://github.com/ripple/rippled

Wrong again, every node constantly audits transactions. It is easily auditable and verifiable.

In Bitcoin terms the ledger is something close to a UTXO set in a deterministic data structure, so to run a full node you only need this data (just like in Bitcoin) and history is kinda optional. Something similar to this approach has been suggested some time ago for Bitcoin too, here's the thread about it: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=88208.0

So far so good...

I think here is the issue that I probably did not explain too good:
You actually do know everyone's individual balance at ledger 32570!

It is not even that large, here it is in JSON format (every entry on a seperate line for better readability):
http://pastebin.com/P24vC3Vf

Every transaction since then is known and the result of applying them can be calculated and verified independently.

only purpose of ripple: make it easier to buy BTC without BTC-fiat exchanges hehehehe  ;D

Will any balances before ledger 32570 ever affect what happens in the Ripple system in the future, yes or no? It's a yes or no question, Sukrim.

If you answer no then we can end the discussion, because it means all the info people would ever need is theoretically provided in ledger 32570 -- in which case there is no need to number it '32570'. Simply number it 0.

If you answer yes then we can still end the discussion, because everything I said prior about not being able to verify how many ripple units will ever impact the system applies.

That's a definite no and that's what I tried to explain before with "it does not matter what happened before a certain point of time".

How so, for someone starting with cash/fiat in a bank?

Then for what reason would you say:


And why not call the current ledger 0, the Genesis ledger? My last question.

Because I don't know what ledgers 0-32569 contain. If you run rippled from back then (or also a current version), you'd start with just the single root account and 100 billion XRP in it. As I was asked about theoretical possibilities, theoretically anything could have happened in there. It is very improbable but not impossible.

32570 is called "genesis" ledger (https://ripple.com/wiki/Genesis_ledger) because it is the oldest available ledger on the network atm. It is not the first ledger though. Ledger 0 is the one with (very, very, very likely) 100 billion XRP, 32570 misses already a few fractions of an XRP from transactions that took place in the meantime. As I said, there is a chance that older ledgers could be reconstructed. There is no way to go "below" ledger 0 though, so that is the definitive starting point.

Rippled actually usually just loads the most current verified ledger (~82 MB or so atm.) and uses this as "genesis" (all balances etc. are known after all and can be traced back cryptographically), you can instruct it to fetch more history if you want to. Bitcoin on the other hand always starts with block 0 as genesis and starting block and replays all transactions since then, because you can not know if a transaction is valid just by looking at the latest block in the block chain.

[ANN] Cripple Payments
Cripple = Cryptographic ripple
Have you had your first cripple?  :D

....sorry....probably not funny.

See you're saying two different things. You say what happens before a point in time is irrelevant, yet all balances are known and can be traced back cryptographically; but they can't be traced back to ledger 0, obviously. Classic definition of trying to have a cake and eat it too.

I actually had an idea for something that I would have called "cripple"... ;)
Idea is on the backburner for now though.

Something that I'd love to see though would be to integrate BTC as second native currency into rippled (yes, this means validators need to track the bitcoin blocks too - compared to what rippled uses ressource wise not much of a deal really...) to be used as alternative to XRP when paying for transactions etc.

You can trace them back to ledger 32570 at the moment, in the future maybe to 0 too. The link between 0 and 32569 is lost atm. though, so 32570 is the earliest one we have and to which one can trace everything back. You need to verify balances in ledger 32570 (they look reasonable and add up to less than 100 billion XRP, as advertised) and transactions since then to verify everything available in Ripple. If you only care about more recent events, you can also define ledger 5.9 million as genesis for yourself, verify this one as being correctly assembled + hashed and only look at transactions since then.

ripple is really frickin cool

haters gonna hate

Every time I read bitcoiners trying to understand Ripple.

https://i.imgur.com/gMiXDJV.png

Why are you all so dumb!? Stick with your simple archaic system if that is all you can wrap your mind around.

Sick of seeing these debates.

Amen +1

Yes, insulting people is a great way to support your view?

Every time I read bitcoiners trying to understand Ripple..
Ripple is not suitable for mainstream users (BTC is not yet either)

• BTC has over 20 to 50+ companies with VC$$$ all trying to make BTC ready for prime time.
• How many companies are actively working to improve Ripple?
• What are the chances Ripple will ever be ready for "the dumb people" to use?

Explain how this works.  Honestly I'm pretty unmotivated to learn about ripple
since it's not a true cryptocurrency and I'm sure I ain't the only one.  If I ain't learning
About it on btc forum, I ain't learning about it lol

Actually it has many uses, including the ability to bootstraps communities out of autarky.

I know how you feel but your post was unhelpful, NWO.   Bitcoiners are a natural ally to the Ripple ecosystem, though and we can't forget that.

Because I don't care if bitcoiners don't understand Ripple. The amount of threads that I have read with Sukrim clearly rebutting or informing bitcoiners about Ripple is ridiculous. The worst part is, those same people are still like...

https://i.imgur.com/DsUHkJC.jpg

From the top of my head there is peercover, ritazachari (jewelry), bitstamp, zip zap, ripplesingapore (gold/ silver) and with crosscoinventures I'm sure there are many more in the pipeline. Theoretically, anyone who accepts BTC accepts XRP due to the Bitcoin bridge (but you probably don't know what that is either). How many companies were involved with Bitcoin after a year? Oh that's right, it was still being premined/ instamined (there's some bitcoiner lingo which is actually relevant!) by Satoshi and his small group of followers.

I'm assuming this is what the OP is talking about http://www.coindesk.com/ripple-courts-developers-entrepreneurs-new-initiatives/

People get abused or treated poorly daily on bitcointalk for not understanding Bitcoin....

When you constantly witness 'senior members' still not grasping Ripple (considering it is so simple) and still yapping on about it being closed source, premined etc it just gets annoying. I don't mind helping genuine newcomers to Ripple (I have activated well over 10+ accounts for new members, friends, family), it is the people who constantly whine like broken records or understand nothing about Ripple (and just post links to RippleScam etc) that annoy me.

It is true, Ripple empowers Bitcoin and they work hand-in-hand. Let them find out after its too late. We have bigger fish to fry than this forum.

People get abused or treated poorly on the WoW forums or youtube for understanding/using Bitcoin.

This is bitcointalk.org, it is kinda expected that people are critical towards anything that might look like endangering BTC. Also, maybe I need to remind you that you were also kinda trolling against Ripple for some time.

Calling people who don't understand a concept stupid, dumb or dense does not help at all. Also generalizing from a vocal minority to "bitcoiners" is a bit far fetched. English is not my native language and probably also not the native language of a lot of people around here, so there can be just very simple misunderstandings too.

ripplescam is relatively well designed and written and I regularly have to fight down the urge to create a similar page, just with Bitcoin as an example of how FUD and twisted words from someone who is relatively well informed about a system really can look like. Then again I constantly try to remind myself that Ripple as well as Bitcoin a few years(!) ago both took some time for me to really "sink in" and that it took quite some time of reading and asking until I understood it better. Pointing out (or making up) flaws of Bitcoin will not make Ripple any better or trustworthy, it will just make Bitcoin look worse. My hope is that while there are usually a handful of trolls showing up who try to upset me from time to time there are people that are genuinely interested in understanding more about Ripple and how it benefits Bitcoin as well as the anonymous mass of "lurkers" who do not post in these threads but just read them and form their own opinion.
Also it helps my own understanding a bit better to be asked beginner questions or to debunk common myths (like the "it's not open source" or "it's centralized" stuff).

You commented on how someone didn't post your entire quote, yet you fail to include the section of mine which refutes your first sentence...

Bold is what annoys me. Underlined is what doesn't. I'm talking about trolls or general hatred towards Ripple.

When you constantly witness 'senior members' still not grasping Ripple (considering it is so simple) and still yapping on about it being closed source, premined etc it just gets annoying. I don't mind helping genuine newcomers to Ripple (I have activated well over 10+ accounts for new members, friends, family), it is the people who constantly whine like broken records or understand nothing about Ripple (and just post links to RippleScam etc) that annoy me.

It is true, I also didn't like Ripple and then I did my own research. I'm an example of someone who has both perspectives. But anyway, like I said. I'm going to keep calling people out for being retarded if they come into Ripple threads going "derp... derp.. closed source, centralized, scam.. derp derp" because that is just idiocy. As mentioned, I don't mind newcomers, general questions, language barriers etc.

Edit: Do you need some perspective? Go take a look at the comments on that article I linked to earlier.

Sure, but judging by some of the juvenile responses on this thread, I think many of the critics are just kids.

I've done a little more reading about Opencoin/Ripple Labs version of Rippled. I no longer see it as a threat to Bitcoin. It is a fundamentally different approach to payments than Bitcoin. I laud the tenacity of the marketroids selling the system (which requires buying XRP), but I will reserve final judgement on it until there is further development and forks to compare it to.

Are you seriously? They have nothing to compare

I laughed  ::)

How are you comparing ripple to bitcoin? both are poles apart

What's the value of ripple? Why should I care about it?

Then the better response is to treat them with respect, but sternly.  It's better to deal with a child as an adult than to stoop to childish memes in response.

What was your motivation on offering this loan https://bitcointa.lk/threads/would-consider-giving-micro-loans.292416/ ?

Maybe because ripple is using the concept of IOU

IOU is a typical way to confuse people and let them fall for the scheme, banks are very good at it. A financially strong person don't need to borrow money, nor lending money, so the concept of IOU only attract those financially weak person. Only banks need IOU, since that will cover the fact that they print money for themselves or they lend customer funds to someone else

When you see the word IOU, you can sense that some scheme is going on here ;)

Yes it does - Ripple and Bitcoin are in direct competition: every dollar spent on the one cannot be spent on the other.

http://themisescircle.org/blog/2014/03/14/the-coming-demise-of-the-altcoins/

XRP and bitcoins compete. Ripple and Bitcoin require a more elaborate analysis to substantiate that claim

Call it "escrowed funds" then?

"Bank note" or "balance" might also be correct terms, in the end it is not strictly defined by the network though what your RippleState entries (the internal name for trust lines) reflect - they can be debt, money, time, goods...

All Bitcoin exchanges (even localbitcoins with their escrow system) use strictly IOUs, not "real" Bitcoins by the way.

You need to spend less than one single dollar buying XRP for a few million transactions + reserves, after that you can spend all other dollars for BTC, dogecoin or whatever else you want to buy on Ripple. It's an exchange mostly with an "altcoin" attached to it for denominating fees, not the other way around.

Yes, but Ripple is much more than XRP, it also includes the IOU rippling mechanism and a distributed exchange. And these aren't just any two merely nice additions, they deal directly with Bitcoin's major weakness, its interface with the fiat world. That won't matter eventually in an all-crypto world, but we have to get there first, and that's where Ripple or something like it can help. If Ripple didn't have these additional parts, it would be much less interesting.

Merchant adoption of ripple is an irrelevant point IMHO. If a merchant were to accept XRP for G&S, MAYBE, it would be relevant. But Ripple does not aim for merchants to accept it, as these merchants are not interested in running a hawala network, Ripple needs to get the banks to do it so they can get rid
of visa and MasterCard. Ripple aims to be paypal, you can't say that paypal competes with dollar vs yuan adoption...

You'd better squeeze all the Charmin you can,
When Mr. Ripple's not around.
Put your head in the microwave and get yourself a tan...

_{i know at least someone will get this}

Exactly.

Although it only costs a few dollars and you will probably never have to buy XRP again (transactions fees are tiny). It is cheaper than others systems (bitcoin, paypal, banks etc), so it isn't too much of an issue.

It's been a long time since I've even looked at Ripple so forgive me if things have changed but one of the big issues to me is that all of the IOUs are treated similarly.  TradeFortress proved this a while back, has this been addressed?  Essentially people lost their Bitstamp IOUs for the bogus TF IOUs.  So long as you trust both parties, the IOUs are interchangeable.  It just seems like another way for people to get scammed.

Exactly, part of the strength of bitcoin is fungibility. So long as gateways are limited to banks then we would expect to see fungibility of dollar IOUs unless there is a potential run on the bank, but the dream of anyone becoming a gateway isn't feasible because the trust level of each gateway is not the same

Just to make it clear, I am not pro BTC or XRP. I am liquid and pro profit. I am ideologically inclined towards bitcoin still want to maximize profit, I think that bitcoiners are attacking irrelevant issues with ripple (premine, technology) rather than the fundamental question of how does a halawa network work on a global scale. If it does ripple or a competitor will succeed, but I don't think it does

That's exactly what the trust relation is for. Do not tell Ripple to trust people that you don't actually trust. Similarly, don't store money at exchanges you don't trust. The only difference is that Ripple explictly talks about trust and IOUs, while exchanges typically pretend their IOUs are real dollars. There is exactly the same kind of counterparty risk as with Ripple. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous.

Ripple is the combination of a cryptocurrency (XRP) + a digital hawala system (rippling) + a distributed exchange. It makes no sense to compare rippling to BTC, the right comparison is XRP to BTC and rippling + exchange to Bitcoin exchanges. And it so happens that the largest exchange, Bitstamp, also is a Ripple gateway, so the two systems are intertwined already.

Apart from the fact that you are making the category error of comparing rippling to bitcoin, it isn't even true that the ideal is that IOUs issued by different users should be fungible. The trust system exists precisely because they fundamentally cannot be fungible any more than bonds issued by corporation X and bonds issued by corporation Y are fungible. Ripple distinguishes between issuers precisely because the counterparty risk isn't identical. In addition, counterparty risk is a function of both the issuer and the holder, a function of their real world relationship. People are much more likely to default on obligations to anonymous strangers than on those to close associates.

so far, NO ONE can explain even one benefit of Ripple.  is this a joke?

Congratulations! Embrace your new title. You have been marked as a retard.

https://i.imgur.com/nL07nCY.jpg

If a completely anonymous stranger wanted to borrow 1 BTC from you, would you trust him?

With enough collateral, yes.
ps. Do you think your comment answered his point?

Nope.  But if a completely anonymous stranger wanted to give me 1 BTC, I'd gladly let him.  That's the problem to me, TF was giving away IOUs, which shouldn't be able to come back and hurt the holder of said IOU.  But they were hurt due to the interchangeability between IOUs. 

If someone gives you an IOU and fails to pay, that's the counterparty risk.  But to intermingle IOUs between multiple issuers makes everything opaque and near impossible to assess risk.

I see Ripple also tried their own quasi-mining attempt with the Computing for Good project.  But like everything else they do, it fails before it even gets off the ground.

Ooh a meme, so clever.  I guess you are scared to make an assertion about the value of ripple
because there is none.

Since this was not sufficiently answered so far imho, I'll give it another shot...

Yes, this has been addressed, new trust lines are created with the "No Rippling" flag enabled by default in the official client (the general default when using the API still is "rippling enabled", though it can be argued that someone who writes their own client might also be able to set flags as she pleases). It also is an option exposed in the UI, so it is easy to set/unset this flag on existing trust lines too.

The basic problem (trusting someone who is not trustworthy) though is something that can not be resolved in any system like Ripple or otherwise, see MtGox or inputs.io or pirateat40 or mybitcoins or ... - you will always have to trust someone holding your funds in escrow at least to a certain point and it is up to you to ask for things that would make it easier for you to trust someone (e.g. audits, open book accounting...).

However, in this context we are not talking about collateral, therefore your comment is void. I am merely stating that you would only extend trust on Ripple to someone you would trust in real life (bank, family, friends etc).

You do realize that you are merely trading IOU's on centralized bitcoin exchanges right? Right!?

What are you talking about? It has been off the ground for months, it only got temporarily halted because a) the distribution was not fair b) IBM revamped the website which messed with RippleLab's code

We've got ourselves another Bitcoin retard!

So if someone came up to you and said "Yeah yo man, I'm scam tagged TradeFortrizzle. I just need yo to trust me for 1 BTC and I will give you 1 BTC for FREE dawggg. Yes FREE, don't miss this opportunity. Call 123I'MGOINGTOSCAMYOU for your FREE (no strings attached) BTC. Because I have loads of free BTC from inputs.io dawgg".

Would you not be suspicious?

Or do you not get Chinese gangsters who live in Sydney Australia offering to grow your penis by 14" with a new secret Chinese herb? Or the free $1,000,000 because you were the 10,000th visitor to a website?

Moral of the story

Use your brain. If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is. This also applies to crypto.

Welcome to the internet.

Speaking of which, do you know why the meaning of the no rippling flag was changed? Previously it meant "don't ripple out through this line", but now it means "don't ripple out through this line from another line with the flag set or vice versa".

https://ripple.com/wiki/No_Ripple unfortunately gives no reasoning.

Maybe ask this at the Ripple forums, I guess there might have been some way to loophole the system in some edge cases otherwise. I didn't really think or research a lot about this functionality though, sorry.

Right now as a system, bitcoin is better because it is accepted by more merchants and has been around longer and despite its flaws is trusted better.

Ripple has been designed with a lot more reflection on what bitcoin could have been.  It is not perfect and right now isn't all that userful, but it is a far more robust and clean platform.  Ripple is trying to get big business and major banks behind it.  If it does this, it will very quickly over take bitcoin because at that point it will do everything bitcoin does and more and will people will be able to use bitcoin within the Ripple system.  This is all IF IF IF Ripple can get its support of major institutions and banks.  It seems to me that they have something to gain, once many other banks are on board, but nobody wants to be first to something like this.  It is only valuable with many players.  It is a good ole catch 22.  It will only work if it has people and then it will be valuable, but nobody wants to be apart of it if it has no value and no outside support.  

There will be other competitors too, as others have mentioned NXT or Etherium, both of which have their pluses and minuses.  Maybe Bitshares or CounterParty.  One thing is clear to me, in the coming years Bitcoin will be a gold standard for the 2.0s platforms.  Sooner or later a 2.0 will be way more powerful though.  Too many things to know for sure.  A major mover with the right backing can still win this.  

Right now Ripple and Bitcoin are complementary and synergistic. Ripple could gain users by offering a distributed Bitcoin exchange, and this in turn would help Bitcoin adoption. In the longer term, XRP could become a rival to BTC, but at the same time greater adoption could help the Bitcoin ecosystem finance rival Bitcoin-based distributed exchanges.

With Bitcoin Core installed I can send BTC to anyone with Bitcoin Core installed. Is there a similar client I could install on my computer that would allow me to send XRP to someone with similar client software installed? I'd prefer a simple installer program instead of compiling code and setting up my own server.

The program is already installed on your computer.

It's called a browser. Really, the ripple client is just a javascript program runnable in javascript enabled browsers.

The grunt work is performed by rippled nodes, of course. This is very similar to thin bitcoin clients which don't actually maintain the blockchain but only show balances and let you create and sign transactions. That's exactly what the ripple client does.

Taking part in the ripple network as a full node is a bit harder than being a bitcoin node, right. But many people don't do that with bitcoin, either.

Onkel Paul

You can use any browser that can run Javascript and run the client there.

Rippled is not necessary to use Ripple, you can operate even a full gateway just fine without it (I'd still recommend setting one up in-house so you are safe from people DOSing RippleLabs' servers). Most "clients" with installers or at least native code that I've seen were trading bots or other specialized stuff, not general wallet applications.

Maybe a package that can be installed but just contains a browser engine and the JavaScript client might be nice to have(?) for people who "need" to install something locally? I don't really see the benefit of having a strictly local client though, there is nearly no computation done besides signing of transactions locally and browsers are easily fast enough to handle that.

Edit: https://github.com/rogerwang/node-webkit looks promising if you want to "install" Ripple-Client locally.

It gives better security, because you know you aren't running hijacked Javascript. Assuming you didn't download hijacked Javascript to begin with...

You can download the client repository and execute it locally, another option might be to have a signed browser extension, similar to the blockchain.info wallet. Node-webkit seems reasonable actually, in case you want a more static/local experience without a browser.

Why did Ripple Labs choose to create XRP rather than use Bitcoin to secure their transactions?

1) They can make Millions/Billions of $$$ by creating XRP
2) Some XRP gets destroyed with every transaction.

That is way too simplified of an account of human behaviour and nature.  "Financially strong" people are part of communities, have families and friends, invest in long term projects, engage in international and soon interstellar trade involving risky ventures.  "Financially weak" people get stuck in unemployment, dead end jobs, and so on.  Each individual has a different risk tolerance, different incentives affecting them, and often enough different terminal goals.  Sure you can use ripple to allocate IOUs, but it can also be used to deal with tips, investment projects, insurance, and a bunch of other stuff we don't really have terms for.  With the possible exception of some extremely paranoid libertarian millionaires, no man is an island and no one doesn't rely on their community or state for something or other.  "Financial weakness" framed so is pretty much universal -- and so the point is to be stronger by working together on a higher order level.

Some reasons I can think of (I do not work for or am affiliated with Ripple Labs by the way, so these are just what I think their reasons are):

BTC are very slow (orders of magnitude slower) to confirm compared to Ripple's ledgers.
Jed said from the beginning he doesn't like the idea of burning electricity to secure the network.
Ripple validators would need to track the ledger _and_ the Bitcoin block chain.
Bitcoin scales poorly, if transactions on Ripple were done on Bitcoin, transaction volume would go through the roof (reminds me that I have to collect stats about transaction volume), already now Ripple likely has a higher transaction volume than Bitcoin, which is currently hard capped at less than 10 TX/s (imagine being able to only do 10 trades globally per second!)
Bitcoin transactions are crazy expensive (https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/5044482 estimates one typical transaction to cost about 0.8 mBTC).
Marketing reasons probably too, also even though it is improving, BTC don't have the best rep out there. It would be kinda hard to get banks to buy BTC first to transact something on Ripple, a fact that Mastercoin, Counterparty et.al. are going to find out soon enough.
Of course also the possibility to make/earn money from the system while being able to go fully open source with it asap (they do not earn money by providing the infrastructure or software, they earn money by people using their product and they hope for the network effect to kick in so there is no fork emerging that is more popular than their network)

They messed up a few things too by the way, calling XRP "ripples" is what bugs me most. Instead of calling the smallest unit (1 µXRP) "drop", they should have jsut called the whole currency "droplets", "waves" or something else. Especially their first target market (this forum) did simply treat it as another altcoin and by having the same name, it messed up a lot imho. (It's like a large bitcoin exchange calling itself "Bitcoin" - just see the confusion with The Block Chain and blockchain.info already)

Merchants are interested in
* Making a profit
* Being a respectable member of whatever community they live in, if only for signalling purposes

If Ripple leads either to new customers or existing customers to spend more money, merchants will, sooner or later, figure it out and adapt.

Likewise if it becomes a cultural norm to accept Ripple for its social effects, that might lead to it too (though as someone who's put a lot of work into making Ripple work in my community, it's more likely that the former would apply before the latter)

I asked you a question so I could address your concerns - the fact that you're ignoring me and just postulating the lack of benefits of Ripple suggests you have an agenda.

How will Ripple Labs comply with government sanctions?

While CFG was not a very good final outcome for sure, and you are absolutely correct to point it out as something that didn't go well...

1) They did produce valid results -- computing cycles were, in fact used for good.  This isn't a 'failure' just not as much as a success as we both might like.
2) It's unclear who 'they' is.  If 'they' means *the entire ripple network* then you're completely off your rocker.  A great deal of successful transactions have occurred, although nothing close to the amount that the bitcoin network has allowed, but still a huge amount of benefits of trade.  I have personally done quite well, and have accomplished projects I would have thought impossible without it.  

Good outcomes have come out of ripple -- we just need more of them.

1) Ripple predates bitcoin
2) *Ripple Labs* is trying to get the big business and banks behind it -- bu tremember Ripple Labs is approximately 0% of the network.  Some of the rest of the network have given up on it.  Some of the rest of the network is working to get big business and banks behind it.  Some of the network is trying to make things work in house, between friends or in other situations that have nothing to do with big business.   And guess what?  The latter two categories outweigh ripple labs' efforts by several orders of magnitude.   Like Bitcoin, Ripple is not a business.  It's a collection of communities and businesses.  It's basically a very small economy.  That's like saying "Guatemala is trying to get big business and banks to invest"....sure it's probably true, that the government of Guatamala does these things but this ignores the vast majority of effort and projects undergone in that economy.  "A major mover with the right backing" cannot outmove a billion chinese people realizing that Ripple is useful to them in organizing their lives without government.  That's where we're trying to go.

3) Stop calling them 2.0 platforms.  Bitcoin 1.0 isn't released, and there will, someday be a Bitcoin 2.0, and these platforms are not that.  This is abuse of version numbers for political reasons.
 

3) They can make XRP worthless and distribute it to every human being on earth once the short term gains from XRP have been realized to them.  You can't do that with bitcoin.

Similar to "sanctioning" the Bitcoin foundation there is not a lot to "sanction" at Ripple Labs to begin with... the network can and will go on, no matter what RL does.

I guess they would just follow whatever sanction hits them, though I don't see it having any effect on Ripple itself.

How do any core bitcoin developers left in the US intend to comply with government sanctions?

So if Ripple Labs is shut down, the network will go on just fine and all transactions will be accounted for in the ledger?

It doesn't matter where Bitcoin core developers are if they stay anonymous.

Yes, anyone can run rippled and be a validator. There might be some stirup because currently a lot of people by default have their validators in their config files and probably didn't change that, but that's all. It's like freenet going down back in the day when Bitcoin was bootstrapped via IRC - you'd have to add IPs manally to connect to the swarm again, then it works again. All mining pools in the US going down at once would probably cause a longer outage on Bitcoin than RL disappearing from Ripple.

Ripple is centralized....

Bitcoin is not centralized....

Bitcoin is 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000^100000000000 times better than Ripple.

So who "controls" the ripple protocol. You talk about nodes. Bitcoin is controlled by a democracy of hash power. Who can implement/control the ripple protocol?

Who 'controls' TCP/IP?  Protocols are not 'controlled'.  If you speak the protocol to a node on the network, the network will listen to you, and you become part of it.  Ripple is not really that democratic, it is more consensus-based.  This might be a little hard to wrap your head around, but it can work.

Yeah but the bitcoin core developers do not seem to be mostly anonymous.

Actually you're an alt account noob.

Mining has become increasingly centralized and exchanges are centralized.

Well, Satoshi for one. Cryptocurrency developers are growing geometrically. Who knows who will be the next coding superstar? Privacy is an important subject to many of them.

Satoshi is gone for over 3 years now (he was one of the very few anonymous core devs) and developer numbers seem to grow horizontally (everyone is creating their own forks left and right), not so much vertically (developing "deeper" into the system) unfortunately. This is a bit off-topic though...

https://ripple.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=6343 (https://ripple.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=6343)

I see nothing temporary about this.  Show me where the project is going to continue.

Ripple has a very low transaction rate at the moment and very few gateways and validators compared to Bitcoin. It's too soon to tell which would be faster on equal footing. Normal purchases are reasonably assured with zero confirmations.

Electrophobia?


That depends on what you are using Bitcoin for. Coordinating an attack on the ledger and on Stratum would be very difficult, so you wouldn't need a blockchain to scrub.


That's not stopping Colored Coin, Mastercoin, and Counterparty from developing layers over Bitcoin. Bitcoin is growing organically. A baby cheetah does not run 60 mph. Bitcoin is capable of outprocessing every other centralized payment system when the block size limit is increased.


Bitcoin doesn't need to replace every face to face transaction, but even if it did, compared to other payment systems, it is cheap. Typical transaction fees tend to be 0.1 to 0.3 mBTC. It's possible for such an exception as 0.8 mBTC, but wallet management with coin control will mitigate these costs when smarter wallets are created.


They said the same thing about the internet in the mid '90s. There is no such thing as bad publicity.


Credit unions take care of their community and care about their members. They will adapt to what best servos their membership. But I presume you mean central banks and investment banks. Their services will no longer be required. Crowd funding is the future. There are plenty of jobs for bank employees in the food service industry.

Motivating development is a double edge sword. Financial incentives create observational bias due to the strong emotional nature of those invested. That's why I advocate a focus on Bitcoin in order to share resources and gain from the greater adoption rather than early adoption speculation. Bitcoin has been growing exponentially and with each year it gains more momentum.


Naming conventions tend to be organic. In my opinion, the most significant quantity of bitcoins is the minimal dust unit of 5300 Satoshis (plus transaction fee) which should be the base unit for now. They will probably be the base units of Colored Coins.

OMG! How did he die? Or maybe you mean they are using their own names now and are working atomically on Bitcoin and its derivatives. Parallel projects don't hurt Bitcoin. Their failures make Bitcoin look stronger. Many of their new ideas can still be incorporated into Bitcoin.

I didn't see the question , what is the question

1. Some distant relative of Ripple that absolutely doesn't resemble Ripple of today was around before.  But the architect of the modern Ripple "Jed McCaleb" didn't start writing code until 2011, long after bitcoin started and he has stated himself that he wanted Ripple to be what Bitcoin wasn't.  From Wikipedia, "This led to the development of a new Ripple system in 2011 by Jed McCaleb. It was designed to eliminate Bitcoin's reliance on centralized exchanges, use less electricity than Bitcoin, and perform transactions much more quickly than Bitcoin."  So yes, Ripple as we know it came after Bitcoin and was a response to it. 

2. Without the work that Ripple Labs has done, there would be 0 Ripple!  Oh yeah, and by the way, who owns most of the Ripple?  That is a pretty big deal.  Usually if somebody owns more than half of the money, they also hold the keys.  I am sure Ripple Labs is doing more.  I am just guessing they are monitoring the network and trying to secure it.  I am also just guessing to they are working and testing new versions of code that will later be released with their stamp of approval.   

3.  Bitcoin was the first generation cryptocurrency using the blockchain.  There are lots of other first generation coins.  The 1.0 and 2.0 doesn't refer to version release numbers, it refers to generations of technology.  Since Ripple was not a clone of Bitcoin but was redesigned from the ground up to be a completely different platform (yes, it is a platform) that is more robust, handles more processes, and is quicker and easier, it represents a generational shift in between the first generation platforms.  So, yes it is a second generation platform but instead of writing "second generational platform", it is much easier to say "2.0".  There are many others including CounterParty, MasterCoin, Bitshares, and NXT.  Ethereum will at least be a 2.0 and maybe even a 3.0 depending on how a person looks at it.  By the way, "3.0" symbolizes for "third generation platform". 

Exactly. Its not a competitor to bitcoin. Ripple is different in many ways and plays a different role. Ripple is currency agnostic, what means that you can use it to trade whatever you want. For bitcoiners, for example, where many tx right now happens off-blockchain, based on trust relationships with exchanges and payment processors, ripple is a good option because is puts sellers and buyers from different exchanges in the same place. Bitstamp is a ripple gateway, so you can withdraw BTC or USD to your ripple wallet and from there, place orders to buy from other entities (individuals or companies), like Justcoin or Kraken.
If you don't like cryptos, you can use ripple to trade FIAT currencies, Gold, dymes, Forever Stamps, etc.

Ripple brings a decentralised discovering and trading system for whatever people think has value, no reason to hate it.

People who might hate ripple are entrepreneurs who are over committed to a "there must be only one" philosophy, very similar to actual bankers philosophy.

Bitcoin is better !!

TCPIP suffers from the double spend problem which is why is isn't used to transfer money.
So the only way we have been able to solve that problem is thru an open ledger, that open ledger is agreed upon by everyone (consensus). In bitcoin hash power (and the economic motivation that stems from having hash power) dictates the open ledger, what dictates maintainence of a trustworthy open ledger in ripple?

The way I see it, blockchain transactions as direct currencies are Bitcoin. Derivative backed currencies and instruments that only use minimal blockchain transactions for security are B². Complex large scale multisig and nLockTime investments will be B³ because they will define entirely new business models. Perhaps Ethereum or something similar will fill that role, but more likely it will be a Microsoft or Oracle product.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557988.msg6101868#msg6101868

24 hr Transaction Volume:

$1,349,494.36

Granted that's not bitcoin big, but that's still not too shabby for an average day.

( http://www.ripplecharts.com/#/ )

The bigger question is what does volume even mean on Ripple?

Technically true but they had a lot to start with, including protocol detail up to and including the ideas surrounding XRP.  Yes it's grown a great deal beyond what it was, but it is effectively the same system that had a prototype back in 2007.  There's a reason why Ryan Fugger got bought out.


You mean 'most of the XRP'.  XRP is not really money, regardless what RL will tell you, and there is enough of it out there for the Ripple network to work even if the rest were hoarded, and even if it's not distributed in a fair manner, this is not a problem for the system.  This has been argued over and over again.  Unless you consider XRP to be a threat to bitcoin, in which case why would you bother?  Bitcoin has the avantage of network of scale and trust and a 4 year lead on that.  There is no contest.



It is godamned lazy is what it is.

Ripple, the annoying "coin" I keep have to filter away on coinmarketcap.com

I still dont get how consensus will work with ripple. Is it POS?

No, every validator specifies a list of other validators he wants to reach consensus with. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj1QVb1vlC0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj1QVb1vlC0) and https://ripple.com/wiki/Consensus (https://ripple.com/wiki/Consensus).

PoS is a weighted (the "stake") version of consensus I guess. Because it would be easy to do sybil attacks (introduce a lot of "sock puppet" nodes that you control secretly) that way, Ripple has a UNL (unique node list) instead, so every validator in the network also is free to choose from the pool of total validators, which ones are likely not colluding. The advantage is that others can not force themselves into the system by just buying their way in (as in PoS), the disadvantage is that it is difficult to build a "real" UNL (that fulfills the "unique" part).

Even that number may be seriously underreporting Ripple's volume. If you look at the source for totalValueSent (https://github.com/ripple/ripple-data-api/blob/develop/api/routes/totalValueSent.js#L75) in the data API, you see that it only checks the volume on five currencies:


Not only does this volume report omit many currencies with non trivial volume, these five currencies are no longer all in the top five every day. Ripple Trade Japan JPY (http://www.ripplecharts.com/#/markets/XRP/JPY:rMAz5ZnK73nyNUL4foAvaxdreczCkG3vA6) in particular has been muscling into the top five on occasion during the last week or two, but it doesn't show up in the reported volume.

Basically, until the API is updated with a broader selection of gateways, treat any Ripple volume numbers as absolute lower bounds.

Whats a good impartial resource to read up on Ripple?

as i know bitcoin is more great cryptocurrency than other cryptocurrency, and i think volume ripple is less than bitcoin , its mean that bitcoin have more users and popularity than ripple.

Ripple despite the fact that is more centralized, has still manage to to get traction and interest from many investor,  especially in the banking space as a replacement of old system like IBAN

but I still think that Bitcoin its much more superior and has thrived even more, creating the entire ecosystem of blockchain and helped many startups to become leader in the space

for the future I hope we will be able to compete all together vs old banks and corrupted systems

payment gateways like ripple will not be possible to replace the position of bitcoin on coinmarketcap, it's just that many big players are there but not for me, even though xrp replaces the ethereum position in coinmarketcap it still doesn't appeal to me

So far today I have seen good ripple achievements, still ranked number 2 on Coinmarketcap. And if we talk about bitcoin, really no one can replace it. I still admit that bitcoin remains the crypto king with all its popularity. And Ripple has already made something great. Please correct my opinion today.
Keep the spirit..

I think that all the same the most important Bitcoin, he was the first, and this is like Adam, and Eva has turned out from his rib, and new cryptocurrencies started to be born from Bitcoin! It's great! It would be even better if Ripple and Bitcoin were together and both were important.

The project XRP and BTC are projects giants and without these projects the cryptocurrency sector simply cannot live, because today they have huge funds. Therefore, I think that there are really great opportunities.

What is the point of comparing such projects? I don’t see what's the point of comparing a BTC project with other projects. The BTC project is the most original project and other projects simply do not make sense, especially if the speed is improved.

Why are people investing in Ripple. I can understand people that are investing in small caps tokens to get profit, I can get hunters that are trying to earn these tokens, I can even get people that are buying tokens during the first exchange dump to save money, but I do not get people that are investing in a coin without a limited supply.

Do you know a lot of coins that are limited? Bitcoin is valued for being limited to 20 million coins, and therefore its value should increase as each Bitcoin is mined. Ripple is in great demand among banks and I am sure that Ripple will be used by many banks around the world.

I think Bitcoin is much more promising than Ripple. Ripple is very dependent on banks, and Bitcoin is their opposite. If the banks give up Ripple, he will die. I'm not sure that the banks are betting on Ripple.

Ripple is company-controlled, and although bitcoin has recently been moving in that direction it still looks like a better pick.
But Ripple sold 535 million worth of XRP just last year, imagine what they could do with all that money - lobbying and whatnot. Who knows, maybe they'll take the #1 spot

They aren't really doing much with it. The protocol has been around for years and this year we're getting first real news that XRP might finally be used for something. Compare it to Bitcoin. People have been transaction in it 9 years ago, but who is using XRP? Ever heard of people who were doing anything with it besides trading?
This centralized bank coin will still be the same thing 5 years from now, when even less people will trust banks.

I think Ripple could do useful things for the crypto industry. For example, they could create a stableblock that would be provided with funds in one or several banks that are Ripple partners. I also think that Ripple could help the exchanges to have access to fiat. But for some reason Ripple does not do it.

I don't encourage some comparison between some tokens; those little differences in the token are what investors are buying. Ripple is enjoying a very good use case and sustainable trade volume but its price still depend on bitcoin. Fund are always

I wouldn't compare Bitcoin with anything at all. Because these are completely different things. Bitcoin has always been a leader and they will remain.

I think for ordinary users like us ripple is not a coin, but for banks this coin is very easy to pay, of course I think for investment you can take but not more than 3% of the Deposit!

This is thread was created 2014 5 years ago and it seems it came true it's a big battle between Ripple and Bitcoin right now, after five years Ripple holders since 2014 can celebrate now because they are now in the second position and a big threat to Bitcoin being the second most popular coins.

As of now, the second position on cmc is not a stable place. I Should even put it as, apart frombitcoin being in the number 1 position, all the other positions are not stable or permanent. Currently, ETH is in the second position and not ripple. This tells you that bitcoin is the only coin that we have to trust and use. The others are just learning from bitcoin's ways but seem to be the best which can never be.

Future ripples grow well as we see in Marketcurrency able to compete with Ethereum coins that have high potential. Maybe a lot of people ignore and think that Bitcoin can't be defeated, yes it's true like that, but little by little Riak starts threatening BItcoin's position in digital money trading, we don't know what will happen in the future.

Yeah, we cannot know what will happen in the future, but to the present moment, there are no serious threats to bitcoin dominance.

Ripple is a very good coin from the look of things, if you buy so much quantity now, you may be a millionaire in future when Ripple hits a price of $10 per coin. I believe this is achievable.

it's good but it's better if you respond to ripple seriously only when you have responded to bitcoin and ethereum first because in my opinion both are clearly better and will be more profitable than riplles, therefore you have to prioritize both of them first before you turn to ripple

There will be no reasons more reasonable when you choose two coins with the highest capitalization now to invest but the profit which you can earn will be not so much

I think you dont have to compare ripple to bitcoin, instead you just need to invest and buy more and more ripple coins for future investments. Ripple is a good standard coin that also has the potential and ability for price increasement. Comparing it to bitcoin is not necessary.

Between Ripple and Bitcoin, of course I am more inclined to choose bitcoin, the reason is definitely clear, bitcoin is the best coin in crypto and no doubt about this, ripple is also good coin but still far below bitcoin, and of course these two coins are each have supporters

Until now, bitcoin is still on top, so Ripple itself has not been able to shift its position. And Ripple is also good as an investment tool in the future even though many people consider coins to be centralized, but development is quite good.

The coin is definitely promising, it will continue to build up strength and fight for second place with Ethereum, but it is impossible to defeat the king, so there is even nothing to argue about

By the time OP posted on Apr. 05, 2014.
Ripple's price was $0.008076 and we all see it went $3 by 2017 and now has been down to $0.303627. In result this is a good increase but let's take about bitcoin.
Bitcoin by that date was $446 and went $20,000 by 2017 and now sitting at $3,600. Both has good increase but still bitcoin gave more.

Agree. Bitcoin will always be on top no matter what. Popularity, usage and many others. Though there are disadvantages like transaction fees but still it doesn't make it less popular to use.

I dont really know why somebody would like to check for such comparison, after knowing fully well that there is no way to compare Bitcoin and Ripple, In as much as the cryptocurrency world is concern, Bitcoin remains the king and it will be had for any coin to come in competition with it.

I also don't understand why bitcoin is compared to ripple. This is actually a very distant difference if it must be compared. And I agree that you say that Bitcoin will still be the sati number in cryptocurrency.

Ripple is offering fast and cheap transactions, but Bitcoin is still the major store of wealth and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Of course any risk averse investor would hold both.

Bitcoin is much more preferable for me then Ripple. Ripple has a number of successful projects behind but it is not an unambiguous argument to buy this cryptocurrency. Bitcoin is much more powerful asset with a proven reputation.

pff) big battle with bitcoin? ;D i mean comoonn)) i understand if ripple have hard fight with ethereum, but with bitcoin, i beging you ;D

I think all crypto assets are now competing to get their respective investors. they strive to keep trading their assets in the market continues to experience continued growth. but not bitcoin, they know if bitcoin assets are always expected to be able to experience price growth, because it can grow the market ability of all existing assets.

Ripple makes sure steps for development, but it seems to me that even this is not enough to move Bitcoin!

I dont think so i think ripple not very good asset investment thats why Ripple get position of 3 on market cap after bitcoin and ethereum. And i think bitcoin will grow and grow again than ripple.

yes, it is simply impossible) no any partnerships can help this coin become better than bitcoin.

Of course, BTC is the choice of people who are now trying to understand what is happening and the choice of those people who have been in cryptocurrency for a very long time. Although I do not think that this is the most important. I think what is important here is that now it’s important that you are still here.

Definitely btc. Btc is the best crypto currency. It's also the most oldest one among all. Btc is said as the mother of all the crypto currency. On the other hand btc is the most famous one.

Here the choice is obvious, bitcoin is a priority, but this does not mean that Ripple is a bad coin, it is promising and can bring profit, it must be bought and kept for a long time

Ripple of course a good coin but I do not think that it is so good that it can replace bitcoin, bitcoin has long been on the market and obviously will not give up the position of ripple

Bitcoin must come first and Ripple or any other altcoin should be your last priority. I have more bitcoin than other altcoins on my portfolio but I don't hold Ripple as part of my alt portfolio. I'm not interested to have more Ripple in the future but who knows if I'll change my belief with this coin.

I suppose that both are good to invest but Ripple will have the better profit than Bitcoin

Bitcoin is indeed good for long-term investment and this has high potential. Ripple is also good, but for short-term investments, the Ripple movement is quite good and this will be able to provide benefits in a short time if you can take the situation well.

ripple and bitcoin are very good coins and have a very good future, these two coins are in the top 5 cryptocurrency,  This coin is profitable just like Bitcoin and Eth,  I think you are a bit late to see the good side of Ripple.

But if you compare it, I think many people prefer bitcoin at this time. well, you know that many people use bitcoin for business development, or stored in the long run. but, XRP is also one of the coins that deserves to be taken into account.

every coin has its own advantages, Bitcoin is the king of crypto and of course people prefer Bitcoin than Ripple. Bitcoin, Ethereum, Ripple, EOS or Litecoin are coins that have good potential and every coin that is located above 5 cryptocurrency is a promising coin. but my main choice remains Bitcoin guys. ;D

It's totally foolish to compare bitcoin with any other coin. Bitcoin will be the top for at least next 10 years. In the meantime, ripple will not be seen anymore because within this time, people will take decentralization more seriously where ripple is centralized.

Bitcoin remains a potential coin and I also continue to choose bitcoin, bitcoin is getting stronger and able to create ideas so many altcoins appear.
A good start for the future when bitcoin gives good value and always affects the value of other altcoins.

As a matter of fact ripple overtakes ethereum somehow in the market ranking which from rank 3 to rank 2. It shows that ripple is quiet but doesn't mean dead. The potential of ripple as related to banks helps its impressive growth and demands either day trading or for long term ripple holding.

but now much investors become smarter,they not hold bitcoin on huge allocation from their portofolio.and now much investors starting hold more altcoin such as ripple, trx, eth and many others.they think if they hold altcoin it will give them more benefits when cryptocurrency price recovered.

Investors have a good strategy if they hold bitcoin for the long term and hold a lot of altcoins for the short term.
So this strategy provides a pretty good Ripple value for the future, let alone being able to compete with Eth.

I was putting bitcoin as the main coin in my portfolios too, ripple is a non sense platform and it's totally crap when i heard a lot of pre mined coin will bne dumped to the market. How much money that already grabbed by ripple foundation for nothing.

Here are ripples and bitcoin, and there is no doubt if bitcoin is still the priority. Riak does have good development and even competition with Eth can shift it. But when compared to bitcoin, that is impossible and may take a long time. Many investors hold bitcoin for long periods and altcoins for variations so they don't get bored in entering the market, they will definitely see and monitor altcoin, not bitcoin.

In my part I believe that ripple has nothing to do with bitcoin, bitcoin is really big enoughf compared to the ripple, market depends on the bitcoin, if bitcoin failed all coins will surely failed and the crypto will be perished bitcoin is the most amazing and the first coin in crypto, that is why it is the most trusted coin on the crypto feild, the trust on the crypto community is really depend on bitcoin itself.

yes I know that bitcoin and riplle are clearly different and cannot be compared to bitcoin or other coins, we also know that bitcoin has the biggest market capitalization and I don't at all think that ripple is good, bitcoin is the market leader in crypto.

Ripple is a basically centralized crypto and bitcoin decentralizded, yet. Otherwise banks would have never used ripple in their transactions. Still, precisely for this reason ripple is outperforming the market. Just look at this chart and u will understand everything https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/XRPBTC/?exchange=BINANCE (https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/XRPBTC/?exchange=BINANCE)

Hey people what's wrong with this infinite combat against ripple let the one how trust ripple invest on it and get burned ripple stated clearly that not only xrp can be used on their networks

It's difficult to compare bitcoins with altcoins including Ripple, this is because the market is very dependent on bitcoin so if the price of bitcoin drops then making the price of altcoins including Ripple also drops.

difficult, in my opinion not, because Bitcoin can't be compared to Ripple or can't be compared, so of course the main choice is Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is the king of coins so that no one can compete with him, the value is very high he always occupies the first position. yes even though Ripple can still be profitable but Bitcoin is still safer than it is.
everyone has different thoughts so people have different tastes and thoughts.

I don't think it is comparable, this has been a debate since 2014, the thread is still alive up until now, and all I can say is that up until now there is still no difference, Bitcoin is still way ahead of Ripple, even if Ripple has outplaced Ethereum in the 2nd spot, Ripple will still not be comparable to Bitcoin.

yes I agree, because until now no can match Bitcoin, and that is a comparison with Ripple, obviously different.
Until at any time it might be the same, Bitcoin is still Bitcoin, the first big coin to be launched.
if both will be mutually beneficial, have chosen both and do not differentiate, while they can still benefit you, use better.

In my personal opinion the return of investment profit is quite highin ripple compared to bitcoin at the current price the downside only for ripple it is centralized coin and un used coins are being. Owned by its company which can cause massive dump when they want to sold some portion of it.

XRP has always had a very high volatility in spite of its structure. Many people have a very negative attitude towards what is happening in the project itself. I think that people understand that XRP is not a fully-fledged cryptocurrency project.

One of the most frequent questions that I meet for some reason on the forum. Why compare such projects that have nothing in common with regards to the structure of the project, and with regard to everything else. I think that the community as a whole will be dissatisfied.