Ok, I just discovered this interview with Chris Larsen (Co-founder and CEO of Opencoin), and he explicitly talks about XRPs as a fixed-amount currency competing with Bitcoins.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3SBzhXpxBhA#t=362s

I think that should be reason enough to stop saying that XRP are not intended by Opencoin to be used as a currency?!

These "stamps" are, in essence, a deflationary cryptocurrency. They are being used as currency, and I see no reason why they will not be continued to be used as currency in the future. I refuse to believe that Opencoin did not see right away that their XRP actually can and will be used as currency. What about the various reports from multiple users (on Reddit and here) who claimed to have spoken with Opencoin employees (e.g. at the conference), who basically admitted that it is their business model to expect XRP to become more popular as a currency, and to eventually take away a significant marketcap from Bitcoin? Maybe these are all TradeFortress sockpuppets in disguise, but IMO this is basically the only logical outcome if Opencoin's Ripple becomes popular - why transfer monetary value with Bitcoin IOUs when XRP serve the same purpose? Again, I refuse to believe that Opencoin did not consider that as a possible scenario, that could potentially bring them (as a for-profit company and as the holders of a majority of all XRP) massive profits.

TL;DR: XRP have increased [edit]shorter[/edit] transaction times and use less ressources. Why still use Bitcoin when we have XRP?

I'm not trying to troll, it's a serious question.

I have been very critical about XRP before, but my main point of criticism has always been Opencoin's position as the "XRP central bank", as they still hold about 99% of all XRP in their possession. I tried to get more information about XRP, and someone directed me to this link: https://ripple.com/wiki/Consensus. If I understand correctly, XRP solve at least two major problems of Bitcoin: Transaction time is much faster, and they require no mining, which means that less energy and hardware is used to secure transactions with the Consensus system. I assume there is also no need to store the blockchain on the hard drives of thousands of users. Sounds pretty good to me?

So for the sake of argument, let's assume that Opencoin is now and will always be an altruistic and trustworthy entity that will never under any circumstances abuse their position, and that they will indeed distribute the XRP in a manner that would be deemed "fair" by the majority of users, and that they will not secretly hold on to the majority of the supply.

In this case, wouldn't it be preferable to abandon BTC and start using XRP instead? What are the disadvantages of the consensus system over the proof-of-work system? Are XRP (or at least a similar system) the future of cryptocurrencies? Will they make Bitcoins become obsolete?

I see this repeated by the supporters of Opencoin's Ripple again and again, but I do not see how this is true. From the wiki:


How can they claim XRP are worthless stamps on the one hand, but then on the other hand they are somehow valuable enough to fund their business? The Opencoin guys MUST be realizing that their XRP do have value (something like 2 cent per XRP at the moment) and that they are traded and used like a currency right now. How can they just ignore that and claim XRP are basically worthless and not a currency? On Reddit it was even mentioned that a VPN service is already accepting XRP as payment. I don't know about the US, but in my country stamps are used like a currency. If you buy things from the post office, they give you your change in stamps. You also get change back in stamps when sending cash to certain mailorder services (less weight than metal coins).

The drastic increase in XRP value during the last weeks is in my opinion a direct result of Opencoin's position as the equivalent of a "XRP central bank". They have nearly complete control over the supply. With demand being as high as it is at the moment, their restriction of the supply makes the price of XRP shoot up. The price of XRP is basically completely in Opencoin's hands and completely dependent on Opencoin's goodwill, they can make it go in whatever direction pleases them. Why should a for-profit company not abuse such a position? I am extremely distrustful of their intentions, and would urge anyone who intends to use their system (which makes using XRP mandatory) to be very cautious.

IT'S BITCOIN BUBBLE RALLY TIME!!! (With a baseball bat)

Can a transaction of XRP from one user to another in the Ripple system be reversed by Opencoin?

What if a Ripple user sells XRP for BTC, then complains to Opencoin that his account got hacked or that he did not recieve his BTC? Will Opencoin be able to reverse that transaction? What if the user threatens with the help of a lawyer to sue Opencoin, to get his XRP or an equivalent amount of $ back? Is the trading of XRP for BTC safe against the kind of frauds that often happen when trading BTC for $ on paypal?

If transactions are reversible like that, then this is obviously a huge problem for everyone who trades BTC for XRP.

Also, how will Opencoin be able to comply with the regulations in place for money transferers like paypal? What prevents Opencoin from suffering the same fate as E-Gold? If authorities find out that questionable transactions were conducted via XRPs (terrorism, drug trading, tax evasion,...), then wouldn't the Opencoin company be highly susceptible to getting shut down rather sooner than later? I think in this scenario, if Opencoin gets shut down, all XRP and all IOUs in their Ripple system will vanish and be completely worthless. Is this the reason why the Opencoin guys keep insisting that XRP are a worthless non-currency, in order to protect themselves from such attacks by authorities?

Ok, Coca Cola comparison:

Let's say Coca Cola (=for-profit company like Opencoin) makes bottles of Coke (=XRP), but without disclosing the ingredients (not opensource). Also, you cannot sue them when drinking their product (=using Opencoin's Ripple, which makes XRP mandatory) gives you problems (no law to prevent misconduct by Opencoin with their system). Nobody would buy that stuff when better alternatives are available (=most cryptocurrencies out there). So Coca Cola hands out a few of their crates of Coke (=the 100% of all XRP which Opencoin "produced" for themselves) to some people, hoping that they will convince others to buy that stuff off of them and to make the beverage more popular.

I am not going to drink that Coke. I would suggest you do not drink it either.

I am not saying that Opencoin's Ripple is a scam, but it could potentially be a big one. They say they will distribute their XRP fairly, but nothing is forcing them to do that. I think they say right now that they are still holding on to 99% of the XRP at the moment. They could give these to themselves and claim that they were freely distributed (like they promised to do) - who can then proof that this is really the case?

Also, they could use their massive amount of XRP to conduct extreme pump-and-dumping, by restricting the outflow of XRP to the point where demand is much higher than supply, which is basically happening right now - how else could the increase in price from 1BTC per 100,000XRP to 1BTC per 5,000XRP within a few weeks be explained if demand doesn't massively outnumber the supply. If they use that opportunity to sell off parts of their XRP holdings they would make huge profit. Then restrict the supply again, rinse and repeat. There is nothing stopping them from doing that.

What if Opencoin gets wind of a raid by authorities, and they sell off all their XRP quickly, which will then be worthless once Opencoin is shut down? What if a rogue employee gets access to Opencoin's XRP stash and conducts shenanigans with them? What if Opencoin uses their central control of the system to shut down accounts on Ripple that hold the most XRP, thereby making their own XRP much more valuable - the sourcecode isn't open, after all? This is a virtual currency, I think there is no law and no judge that could condemn them for any misconduct. The situation reminds me of "Bitcoin Savings And Trust" (pirateat40 ponzi scam), where many were warned not to put their trust into a single entity who could easily scam them out of their money without any potential juristic consequences for the perpetrator.

This is all just speculation, and I may be completely wrong with everything I suspect. But Opencoin is a for-profit company, they are per definition most likely interested in creating profit. I am not going to give them the trust that they will not abuse their system, in which they hold so much power. I have no reason to.

Also, I want to mention that I am not opposed to altcoins in general. I made the "Name your TOP 3 altcoins!" thread a while ago, and I will stick to my statement there that I love all the altcoins, with the exception of Solidcoin and now the in my opinion even more flawed XRP. I won't support these in any way, and I urge everyone to be very cautious about Opencoin and their XRP. Maybe look into Open Transactions for a version of Ripple that does not make the use of XRP mandatory.

Do you mean Ripple in general, or Opencoin's version of Ripple?

What I think Ripple should be is "a non-centralized non-privately owned debt/IOU network." And this sounds like an interesting idea to me. Unlike many others in this forum, I am not generally opposed to trying out such a system, seems like an interesting experiment.

But Opencoin's version of Ripple is different, I think. It is centralized, privately-owned, non-opensource, with a single point of failure (Opencoin dead=Ripple dead). It seems to me that Opencoin turned Ripple into a potential scam by connecting it to the XRP currency, which has been 100% "premined" by Opencoin. A 100% premined, centrally controlled, non-opensource currency should not be supported, in my opinion.

The supporters of Opencoin's Ripple keep saying that, but I do not believe this is true. Opencoin states that they wanted to use the XRP they gave themselves to serve as their own payment for developing their version of Ripple.  This would not make any sense if Opencoin did not expect XRP to actually become worth enough to serve as a currency. Also, who cares what they were designed for, when reality shows that they obviously are being used as currency.

I keep repeating myself, but XRP seems to me like the potentially biggest premine scam ever pulled off: 100% of the XRP for themselves, and if they have a good day, they may stick to their promise of distributing them in a fair manner. Personally, I am not willing to give a for-profit company enough trust to expect this to really happen.

Why divide by 20 billion? You mentioned yourself that there are 100 billion in total?

And how is the value of a limited currency dependent on the worth of the company that hands them out?

I was thinking the same, and therefore I gave the BTC I got for my XRP to the Bitcoin100 charity. I suggest that others who recieved XRP do something similar. Ripple seems to me like the potentially biggest premine scam ever pulled off. Opencoin (the creators of Ripple) gave themselves 100% of the XRP, and they are a for-profit organization. I have serious doubts that a for-profit venture has anything other than maximizing their profits in mind, so I see no reason why I should trust them to fairly distribute their XRP. Please think twice before you actively participate and support this potential massive premine scam.

Ripple seems even worse than Solidcoin to me. The Solidcoin developers premined a large fraction of their coins, and the community raised a big fuss about it when it was discovered. All trust was lost, Solidcoin flopped (and rightly so). I am wondering, why is it suddenly acceptable for Opencoin to engage in an even bigger premining operation? Besides, the solidcoin guys had the same reasoning as Opencoin does: "We will only use those premined coins for the greater good, to help stabilize the currency. Trust us! Also, we deserve those coins for our efforts."

There are some discussions about Ripple(s) going on right now on /r/bitcoin.
The Ripple supporters alternate back and forth between
"XRP are as good as worthless and will totally never be used as a currency, guaranteed"
and
"XRP do have worth and will be used to pay Opencoin for their efforts in creating Ripple, which is totally fair and not a problem at all, even when they premined 100% of the XRP themselves and are a for-profit organization that will most likely try to maximize their profits in any way possible".

I would probably be a great supporter of the Ripple system, if the way Opencoin designed it didn't seem to me like the (potentially) biggest premine-scam ever pulled off.

Is Worldcoin the new Litecoin?

Ok, I just googled that and found this thread.

As you can probably easily tell by looking at my avatar, I am not a smart man, so honest question: Is this a joke?

Edit: Also, there is no url in your posts. Also, I think your comments tend to get cut off somehow, because they end with commas.

Source, please?

I can feel it in my bones that Powercoin could be hitting the exchanges very soon!

GO POWERCOIN!!

500 Satoshi.

69,000 Satoshi.

Ripples were sold to user "tclo". Thanks.