Okay, from what I see in Ripple here is my suggestion: Anyone from Ripple developers willing to comment my suggestions above? |
|
|
|
Maybe the mods will do something, maybe they will let him troll this thread up. They won't. They are bought. BFL is a big sponsor to this forum. Of course, spending their customers money. You can expect this thread to be locked soon or moved to off topic. |
|
|
|
Bryan, as I said, I'm not interested in your stupid bet about "When will BFL ship ASICs." That's not the issue. LOL. Why don't you ask your customers if that's an issue or not? |
|
|
|
|
Okay, from what I see in Ripple here is my suggestion:
1. The principal mistake with XRP, it might be a result of the commercial nature of the project, is that it is created as a currency. XRP has to be a bond, not a currency!
2. The bond issuer must not be a single company but the pool of Ripple severs that maintain the shared Ledger. The bond holder should be every Ripple customers that is willing to transact on Ripple network. This is why customers must purchase these bonds in advance.
3. XRP bonds will represent transaction reference/numbers reserved on the General Ledger for future transactions. Bonds are redeemed if they are attached to a transaction. Until used (redeemed) they can be freely sold to new owners at market rates using Chaum's blind signature mechanism to transfer ownership and later verified by the issuer when redeemed by a digital bearer.
4. XRP bonds will have expiry date (the needed demurrage effect), say 3 months or 6 months after they are issued by the issuer. After this period they are considered null and void. This is why bond holders will have incentive to sell them if they think they've more bonds than they'll need to pay with for their transactions. The number of currently issued and not redeemed XRP bonds as well as their respective expiry dates must be absolutely transparent to the entire system in every single minute!
5. Very convenient tool to issue XRP (as tn bonds) is offered by colored bitcoins project. Actually, XRP bonds will be colored bitcoins! After they are redeemed or expire XRP bonds are just ordinary bitcoins.
6. Different transaction types on Ripple network must require different number of XRP to be paid (redeemed) by the user. It must be a dynamically defined number depending on current server load as well.
7. The IOU's must have expiry date as well. Never forget, Ripple servers will have to maintain the network irrespective of customers' activity! If used in a transaction that changes the record kept at the corresponding gateway then their expiry date is automatically extended. In other words, if IOUs are used as cash-only they must have maximum life span like bank bills are worn-out while changing hands.
8. A mechanism for internal competition between Ripple servers issuing XRP bonds must be set in place to ensure maximum value for bond holders.
9. A proof of work must be implemented before a server is allowed to become a part of the pool issuing XRP bonds!
10. Very strict economic model must be developed for all the participating groups maintaining Ripple network so that they all have equal potential for profitability.
Ripple server is the key indeed and more can be suggested only after its source is opened.
|
|
|
|
XRPs have all it takes to become a good currency So is the dollar, the euro, the pound, the yen. Well, until the moment when the corresponding central authorities decided to print new trillions of these "good" currencies. How is XRP different? Oh, the central authority promised not to print more than 100 billion? Is that what makes XRP a good currency? Um, no. Are you sure? Think about "Print" not as a printing press but about the "Print' button on you keyboard! |
|
|
|
I'm still an opponent of "managed money supply". This is the only correct and economically sound approach. Money is just a measure of value. Just like meter is the measure of length and kilogram is the measure of weight! What is the point of "managing" the length of a meter or the weight of a kilogram? The only reason of doing that is for your personal gain to convince other people that something is longer/shorter or heavier/lighter than it is. Unless you believe that the so called "noble lie" is something good? In politics a noble lie is a myth or untruth, often, but not invariably, of a religious nature, knowingly told by an elite to maintain social harmony or to advance an agenda. The noble lie is a concept originated by Plato as described in the Republic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_lieyup, what I've been saying all along. Money is just information. No. Money, as already said, is a measure of value. You must have a standard for the measure. The result of the measurement process is the information. The tool you measure with is not just information. It must be a part of the objective reality around us. |
|
|
|
XRPs have all it takes to become a good currency So is the dollar, the euro, the pound, the yen. Well, until the moment when the corresponding central authorities decided to print new trillions of these "good" currencies. How is XRP different? Oh, the central authority promised not to print more than 100 billion? Is that what makes XRP a good currency? Transaction fees have to be paid either in BTC or Ripple IOUs (as per BTC/IOU exchange rate). Introducing XRP is what will kill the whole idea of Ripple. XRP is just another private currency like AmazonCoin! |
|
|
|
How many times do I have to explain this?
Just answer my question! Do you think my grandma won't deserve a scammer tag if she delivers "something" after indefinite number of delays and after outsourcing every possible aspect of ASIC creation? BFL is incompetent?
BFL is incompetent scam. |
|
|
|
You contradict yourself, again, because you admitted here that BFL will deliver "something", hence making them not a scam. Being late in delivering a product makes them, at worst, incompetent, but not scammers. LOL. How do I contradict myself? After almost a year of delays even my grandma can deliver an ASIC if she collects 20 million from greedy brainless sheeple and outsources every possible aspect of the ASIC creation... Do you think my grandma won't deserve a scammer tag if she delivers "something"? |
|
|
|
|
BFL is a scam!
Soon it'll be 1 year since they begun taking "pre-orders". They deliberately failed to inform their customers that actually they are not customers but investors! They took millions from their investors in "pre-orders" without any obligation! Their only obligation is "Thank you for your money. We'll do what we can whenever we can". This is not company-customer relation. This is company-investor relation!
|
|
|
|
wager that BFL will deliver ASICs in 2013 in escrow. hahaha... So you are not confident that BFL will deliver ASICs till August 2013? How about September or November 2013? |
|
|
|
For example, say we want Bitcoin to better support nanotransactions. We could withdraw bitcoins from the block chain into a system optimized for microtransactions. Then, when we had a balance we wanted to cash out, we could withdraw back to the bitcoin block chain. The same thing could be done for faster confirmations. However, for this to work, we either have to have a central authority who holds the keys or we have to each pick our own issuer as Ripple does. The question is ... is there a better way? This is too ambitious. I'm afraid I have to better understand and figure out what you're really trying to achieve? Time to take a walk in the mountain. |
|
|
|
This doesn't solve the problem either. It still makes it so that one and only one entity can transfer any particular asset. No. Alice withdraws the asset from the Issuer X. She transfers this assets to Bob by signing it with a blind signature. Bob is transferring this assets to Carol by doing the same. Carol transfers it to David. David deposits this assets to Issuer X. Thus Issuer X knows only the withdrawing and the depositing parties - Alice and David. They know nothing about Bob and Carol or how many people were in the chain between Alice and David. This is why it is called cash-only mode in OT server. |
|
|
|
That's what we want to avoid because it requires access to a Bitcoin server, takes many tens of minutes for confirmations, requires some authority to hold the keys for the Bitcoin transactions, and so on. But you are not dealing in bitcoins! In Ripple your transactions are in bitcoin tokens (bitcoin IOUs). Bitcoin IOUs require a central authority to issue them. Why transferring bitcoin IOUs should be any different from transferring USD IOUs or EUR IOUs issued by one and the same ripple gateway? To think about the problem another way, try it like this: Suppose I want to "deposit" namecoins into the Bitcoin blockchain, trade them around with Bitcoin transactions, and then let their final owners "withdraw" them from the Bitcoin blockchain back into namecoins. How can I do that? I'm not sure why would you need this in Ripple@ But as far as I know there is only one solution to this problem - the blind signatures proposed by Open Transaction. You might need to look at the OT server cash-only mode! That may help as well: http://wbl.github.com/bitcoinanon.pdf |
|
|
|
> Why do you think, say USD IOU issued by gateway A will always be in par with USD IOU issued by gateway B?
They might not be. there can easily be an exchange rate between them in the distributed exchange. So I can't transfer 10 ripple USD issued by gateway A to a merchant that is pricing their products in ripple USD issued by gateway B without exchanging them first? That will lead to doubling the fees for every transfer. 1 XRP for the exchange and 1 XRP for the actual transfer? If there are 1 million gateways issuing ripple USD how many currency pairs will we have in ripple USD being both base and counter currency? There are also euros, pounds, yen, franks etc. This will be speculator's heaven and a price chaos?! |
|
|
|
A gateway is some business that has agreed to issue and redeem ripple IOUs. You take your money to a gateway and the gateway gives you a ripple IOU. You can send this IOU to other people, trade it for XRP or BTC or whatever. You can take your IOU back to the gateway and the gateway will send you money. This is essentially what paypal or dwolla or banks do now. I don't think this is the same what paypal or dwolla or banks do. Why do you think, say USD IOU issued by gateway A will always be in par with USD IOU issued by gateway B? |
|
|
|
Right, but all of this either requires a central authority or trading on the bitcoin block chain. I don't see how this allows you to trade off the blockchain without a central authority. I may not understand what do you mean by "trading on the block chain" but if I understand it right then you may not be aware of what does coloring really mean? Colored bitcoins can be transfered between different owners just like ordinary bitcoins. There is no need for a central authority to keep transaction records. To check whether a transaction or transaction output is of color RED we need just to find whether we can trace it back to the genesis transaction (the IPO of the issuer). Transaction is of color RED if all of its inputs come from transactions of color RED. Bitcoins of color RED will turn into ordinary bitcoins if they are mixed with anything but color RED. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=106449.0https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=114571.0 |
|
|
|
The issuer of the colored bitcoins is in control of the initial offering and the final redemption. There is no central authority needed to transfer colored bitcoins. They are transfered in the same way the colorless bitcoins are transfered.
Then what does the coloring buy you? This is basically just identical to uncolored Bitcoins. Remember, the ideas was to avoid having to trade on the Bitcoin blockchain. You don't trade on the block chain! I'll just re-quote: By the original design bitcoins are fungible, acting as a neutral medium of exchange. However, by carefully tracking the origin of a given bitcoin, it is possible to “color” a set of coins to distinguish it from the rest. These coins can then have special properties supported by either an issuing agent or a Schelling point, and have value independent of the face value of the underlying bitcoins. Such colored bitcoins can be used for alternative currencies, commodity certificates, smart property, and other financial instruments such as stocks and bonds. |
|
|
|
A closely related problem is finding a way to move Bitcoins off the main block chain and into another system in such a way that they can be retrieved by their new owners in the Bitcoin block chain without a central authority. Why do you need to move them off the main chain? Isn't it enough to mark them or color them? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=106373.0 Without a central authority, who would control the keys needed to transfer the colored coins? The issuer of the colored bitcoins is in control of the initial offering and the final redemption. There is no central authority needed to transfer colored bitcoins. They are transfered in the same way the colorless bitcoins are transfered. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
