All these slowpoke responses, maaku's project is probably the single most thing that's happening on the technical side, yet people hardly paid attention  Luckily, Vorhees came to the rescue.... |
|
|
|
That's nowhere near what I said.
I said what you forgot to say--they maybe just out there to siphon off people's money, nothing more. |
|
|
|
Misterbigg is right, and Jed McCaleb has first hand experience of being shut down by the government. I think he knows how important it is for OpenCoin to make sure it's no longer in control of Ripple as soon as possible - but no sooner. And this time round, the stakes are much, much higher.
Good guys will always be good guys, politician keep their promises, yup, both make sense. |
|
|
|
...
* The colored coin concept is HUGELY powerful - I had thought it an interesting diversion before I came but, after it was explained a few times, it made me realise just how versatile the core "distributed ledger" metaphor really it.
Of course. Everyone likes a free lunch and sees a way to get rich by sponging off the work of others. Not sure I understand. What are you objecting to? The repupurposing of the bitcoin network for the tracking of real-world assets? something else? Essentially that, yes. I'm bummed out that it takes so much overhead already that users (including my friends) are discouraged from running a full node. In other words, are no longer reasonably capable of being 'peers' the the supposedly 'peer2peer' solution. That lie is finally starting to be deprecated it seems...years after I suggested that it might be intellectually honest to start doing so... Anyway, the issue will only get worse when they need to process data for everyone who wants to use Bitcoin as a reliable messaging and storage solution. It does seem that there is a significant overlap in the groups of people who bitch most loudly about the fees/block size are they who are all ga-ga about colored-ish utilization. I have seen many more people willing to store hundreds of gigabytes of porn on their harddisk, then people willing to store the blockchain. And it's not free lunch, you store the blockchian for your own freedom, which is not free, and miners are paid to run the infrastructure, that's exactly why Bitcoin is not a pyramid scheme. |
|
|
|
|
I would strongly suggest anyone who doesn't have a clue to stay away from Bitcoin, not everyone can get used to a life of financial freedom and independence, you need to be mentally prepared.
|
|
|
|
At least it isn't about some magical man from the sky that can make something out of nothing. Plus, we've been to the moon, and still no man from the sky.
No it's about a magical man from "Japan" that can make something out of nothing. Plus, we've been to Japan and still no Satoshi Nakamoto. Wrong church, that has to be the church of central bank which is next door. |
|
|
|
|
Even if Opencoin releases their source code as they promised, it takes very little to create a clone network that makes a bit of improvement here and there, bundled with another currency hot off the "printing press", which its creators will do everything(yeah, including being a better network operator than Opencoin) to push the price to very high level.
In fact I believe most of the things that Ripplers boast about Ripple can be easily implemented by slightly modify Bitcoin's source code, just that no one will try to implement such a flawed system.
|
|
|
|
rafety58 == TradeFortress  +1 |
|
|
|
YOU THINK THE DHS IS ONLY TARGETING MT GOX? NO! THEY ARE TARGETING BITCOIN
BE SAFE OUT THERE. I AM NOT SUGGESTING PEOPLE USE RIPPLE. USE A BRAINWALLET. BUT RIPPLE IS NOT AFFECTED.
You are not safe out here, do you have the telephone number of your psychiatric ward on you? |
|
|
|
[...]
Ripple reminds me of Google wave. It was neat, it had lots of potential, it was geeky, the few people who got it were really excited, and it ended up being totally worthless.
XRP's market cap is currently 1.875.000.000USD - more than 37% higher than BTC And I still see nearly nothing real being bought with it(I checked nearly all Ripple forums before I say that), does that mean it's the greatest scam ever?  |
|
|
|
OP can't be serious if he says he was talking at the conference but the identity of his "political zone" is still a mystery.
I'm pretty sure someone said it's Nicaragua Hmm. But is there anything issued by the government mentioning Bitcoin? He said he can't make it public until everything is finalized...... And he doesn't really seem like trying to impress people.... Seriously, someone went to give a talk at the conference about a Bitcoin special zone, and all we can get now is just hearsay? Really? |
|
|
|
|
Looks interesting. What's your random number source?
|
|
|
|
Memorize your private key and delete any trace of it, having used a secured offline pc.
So let's say someone knows that I own a large sum of bitcoins. What's to deter someone from holding a gun to my head and threatening to kill me unless I tell them my private key? Point being, holding all bitcoins in 1 wallet doesn't seem too feasible. You should try some deniable encryption technique, and hide your Bitcoin purchases with the noise of the network. |
|
|
|
Adding what I said in the other thread:
Ripple reminds me of Google wave. It was neat, it had lots of potential, it was geeky, the few people who got it were really excited, and it ended up being totally worthless.
I see it as a bunch of ad-hoc solutions hacked together, with no brilliancy at all. In fact, you can just modify the Bticoin code slightly to come up with something very similar to Ripple. The network effect of transfers, and the trust aspects of it are actually pretty clever. It has potential. But in being clever, they ruined everything that makes Bitcoin brilliant. Bitcoin is brilliant because it is the perfect game theory play. It motivates everyone to use it, intrinsically. Ripple motivates no one except OpenCoin. The "trust aspect" is what I would call "ad-hoc", by trying to reconciliate with the status quo, not that it's entirely unnecessary, but the established do it much better than them.(As corrupt as the banksters can be, certified financial professionals can still handle debt matters much better than one random sucker on the internet), there is no reason for people to justify the cost of transition. Other than that, I agree with you. |
|
|
|
Ah, I see the problem of my example. When I send currency from Bitstamp into the Ripple system, it vanishes from my Bitstamp balance and appears in Ripple. To reappear, I have to send it from Ripple to Bitstamp. Forgot about that. So, if the Ripple account balances work fine, this is not an issue. I'll have to think about the ramifications. once again, licensed money transmitters or banks are the only ones that are going to be allowed to perform these activities. these are critical for the Ripple system to work. Why, how is it different from the licenses required for exchanges like MtGox? Do you mean that the people who do market arbitrage via the Ripple system need such a license? absent that, its inferior to Bitcoin as it won't even be able to function as it depends on trust. You forget that XRPs require no trust. misterbigg has been quoted as stating that gateways will probably need to be banks with the appropriate licensing to provide large enough trust centers to facilitate enough liquidity throughout the system. i think he's right about this need but fear it represents points of centralization. he's also criticized Bitcoin as not having an unlicensed bridge from BTC to fiat. well, neither does Ripple. but the negative consequences for Ripple are much greater. "As long as my investment goes up in value, let us allow the banksters to fuck us a few times over, no big deal."? |
|
|
|
Ah, I see the problem of my example. When I send currency from Bitstamp into the Ripple system, it vanishes from my Bitstamp balance and appears in Ripple. To reappear, I have to send it from Ripple to Bitstamp. Forgot about that. So, if the Ripple account balances work fine, this is not an issue. I'll have to think about the ramifications. once again, licensed money transmitters or banks are the only ones that are going to be allowed to perform these activities. these are critical for the Ripple system to work. Why, how is it different from the licenses required for exchanges like MtGox? Do you mean that the people who do market arbitrage via the Ripple system need such a license? absent that, its inferior to Bitcoin as it won't even be able to function as it depends on trust. You forget that XRPs require no trust. misterbigg has been quoted as stating that gateways will probably need to be banks with the appropriate licensing to provide large enough trust centers to facilitate enough liquidity throughout the system. i think he's right about this need but fear it represents points of centralization. he's also criticized Bitcoin as not having an unlicensed bridge from BTC to fiat. well, neither does Ripple. but the negative consequences for Ripple are much greater. Adding what I said in the other thread: Ripple reminds me of Google wave. It was neat, it had lots of potential, it was geeky, the few people who got it were really excited, and it ended up being totally worthless. I see it as a bunch of ad-hoc solutions hacked together, with no brilliancy at all. In fact, you can just modify the Bticoin code slightly to come up with something very similar to Ripple. |
|
|
|
Guess what? I can create a Ripple in a day's time. I just adjust the block generation time to 20 seconds(yeah, a lot of orphaned blocks and a lot of wasted computing power, but you guys will figure it out yourself right? In the end one branch will win, it's called consensus! ) And just to make sure that no one gets harmed because of their discarded blocks, I will just generate all the coins(XOPs I call them  ) in the genesis block, and reward them to whichever validators that please me most. Job done!  |
|
|
|
I think the PR work OpenCoin is doing is really good, because they are appealing to people's dislike of MtGox's status and naivities of "decentralized exchanges". The main narrative is "we are not here to threaten you, we only want to help Bitcoin". It's clever, really.
The truth about the decentralized exchanges is that while Ripple performs a slick unified interface, the exchanges themselves are still just that, centralized market places, subject to theft, legal issues, etc.
The best part of their PR is they choose the correct audience: you can only find people who control significant amount of money and believe in bullcrap like that at the same time, among Bitcoiners. |
|
|
|
i simply asked misterbigg why a bank or financial institution would voluntarily participate as a gateway in the Ripple system when they have the Fed as an enabler? why would they submit to OpenCoin?
anything less than a bank as a gateway will be considered a money transmitter and have to comply with FinCen regs.
Then Opencoin will have to overhaul their system already, they issue only IOUs, which are legally not enforceable, I am sure people will flock to lend money that way.... Ripple doesn't look like it's created to meet some real needs, it looks like it's created to "look different from Bitcoin and look innovative". |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
