Ripple: A Distributed Exchange for Bitcoin

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

I listened to Chris Larsen today in the alt chain panel and I can say that after all the questions posed about ripple were asked I was not convinced by Chris' that ripple is a trustworthy decentralized system.

Many claims and not much proof given it is STILL closed source.

Ripple / OpenCoin Inc had a booth at the conference. Now what for?

None of the other alt coins need a booth to promote the chain. This shows that ripple is centralized and you must trust the ripple devs and the OpenCoin owners that they will not screw you or get shut down by regulators.

As mentioned in the other thread - OpenCoin has a contingency plan in effect saying that if they do get shut down by regulators, the source (which is open source, just not released) will be released, and plans for the network to continue will be executed.  Regulators will not kill Ripple, though apathy and other things might.

What you said is completely irrelevant. The current facts are:
- Ripple is NOT open source (lie !)
- Ripple is NOT decentralized (lie !)
- Ripple does NOT use the same underlying cryptography as Bitcoin (lie !)
- Ripple can print any amount of XRP they want at any time (especially if government "asks" them to)

Regulators will not kill ripple ? It is EXTREMELY EASY for regulators to kill Ripple. All they need to do is force OpenCoin to inflate ripple into oblivion (or they can just send them to Guantanamo - whichever is easier).

Also if current Ripple is closed by government and they actually open the sources, the new - open sourced version will be something completely different (as it will not be centralized). All "old" XRP will probably be lost (because of central point of failure).

[themusicgod1]

What you said is completely irrelevant. The current facts are:
- Ripple is NOT open source (lie !)
- Ripple is NOT decentralized (lie !)
- Ripple does NOT use the same underlying cryptography as Bitcoin (lie !)
- Ripple can print any amount of XRP they want at any time (especially if government "asks" them to)

Regulators will not kill ripple ? It is EXTREMELY EASY for regulators to kill Ripple. All they need to do is force OpenCoin to inflate ripple into oblivion (or they can just send them to Guantanamo - whichever is easier).

Also if current Ripple is closed by government and they actually open the sources, the new - open sourced version will be something completely different (as it will not be centralized).

First of all, you have no grounds to call me a liar.  Let's get that clear right away.  We can disagree about OpenCoin's intent, and we can argue back and forth on #1 (is 'unreleased open source' 'open source' enough?), but even given those caveats Ripple is definitely decentralized, and you're confused if you think otherwise.

All they need to do is force OpenCoin to inflate ripple into oblivion (or they can just send them to Guantanamo - whichever is easier).

This only works if the network accepts it...which if the regulators are threatening to guantanamo the contingency plans go into effect, and the network starts to bloom without the extra XRP.  Also WHO CARES if XRP are inflated into oblivion?  XRP are practically worthless anti-spam tokens.  Let's hope they DO inflate XRP by an extra few orders of magnitude before they go public, to make absolutely sure that they are cheap enough to be easy to obtain.  I do not think this is in the cards, though I think that lowering the reserve requirement also works to the same end in practice, I do not think that it matters at all how many XRP there are just what the reserve requirements are.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

What you said is completely irrelevant. The current facts are:
- Ripple is NOT open source (lie !)
- Ripple is NOT decentralized (lie !)
- Ripple does NOT use the same underlying cryptography as Bitcoin (lie !)
- Ripple can print any amount of XRP they want at any time (especially if government "asks" them to)

Regulators will not kill ripple ? It is EXTREMELY EASY for regulators to kill Ripple. All they need to do is force OpenCoin to inflate ripple into oblivion (or they can just send them to Guantanamo - whichever is easier).

Also if current Ripple is closed by government and they actually open the sources, the new - open sourced version will be something completely different (as it will not be centralized).

First of all, you have no grounds to call me a liar. 

Misunderstanding. I did not call YOU a liar, i called Ripple/OpenCoins liars.

we can argue back and forth on #1 (is 'unreleased open source' 'open source' enough?)

There is nothing to argue about. It is either open source now or it isn't. And it isn't so it is logical that IT IS NOT.

, but even given those caveats Ripple is definitely decentralized, and you're confused if you think otherwise.

There is nothing decentralized about ripple if they can CENTRALLY print more XRPs (which they admitted themselves BTW).
It is simple logic and you are just wrong. Nothing to argue about at all.

This only works if the network accepts it...

Bullshit. As long as there is no open sourced server code, the network can do nothing but accept it.
It is not possible to FORK Ripple, so how can the network *NOT* accept it ? Does it have any choice ?

The only real choice that is given is to stop using Ripple.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

It is not possible to FORK Ripple, so how can the network *NOT* accept it ? Does it have any choice ?

This.

People are forgetting OpenCoin Inc **already** inflated XRPs. The account reserve has being reduced from 300 XRP to 50 XRP. What does this mean? 250 XRP per user has just being freed up to spend on other stuff. Inflation.

OpenCoin Inc's best interests are different from you, Joe Q [User/Hoarder/Developer].

Also, check out their joke of "bug bounty" - "break our system, and we will pay you premined currency from our broken system"! I have actually got bug hunters / pentesters coming to me (as ripplescam.org)

[cypherdoc]

i had a direct conversation with Chris Larson after the Alt chain session.

during the session he claimed that Ripple has no counterparty risk.  the obvious thing that popped into my mind immediately was this ability for OpenCoin to print more XRP's.

so i approached him at the end and mentioned that claim and then gave him the example of how many of us feel the USD has counterparty risk in the form of inflation via the Fed.  he nodded in agreement and then i asked him why wouldn't XRP fall into that same category.

he immediately retorted that OpenCoin will not ever print anymore XRP once the code is released and that it would be hard coded that way.

i then pointed out that if that was true then the value of the remaining XRP's in circulation would certainly go up in value over time with OpenCoin having the most to gain since they held the largest share.  he nodded in agreement and said that was their business model.

knowing those facts, i should've pushed him to wall by asking the following questions but i didn't want to embarrass him too much as he seemed already very uncomfortable:

1.  if XRP's are being destroyed with every tx and there is only ever going to be the fixed supply, then what happens to Ripple when all the XRP have been destroyed?
2.  as the value of XRP gets pushed higher and higher via destruction, won't tx fees eventually become so huge as to be uneconomical for funding tx's?
3.  won't OpenCoin eventually perform a dump of their XRP holdings to cash out? (he acknowledged that)

Larson can't have it both ways.  if he allows XRP's to eventually all be destroyed, the system will fail.  if he changes the rules and allows more XRP's to be printed then effectively he is no better than the Fed.

they are caught in a contradiction.

[HostFat]

They said that with the consensus system it will be possible to add more divisibility, to change needed XRP (to open account, making path ...) and/or multiply the XRP for X on every accounts. (this will maintain the balance difference between accounts)
So it will never happen that all XRP will be destroyed.

[smoothie]

If OpenCoin is so "open" why isn't their source open yet?

Anyone with closed source code can claim whatever they want with no real proof.

Why not open the source so the truth of how ripple is truly structure in the code is exposed? This reminds me of solidcoin 2 and micro cash which was closed source.

[Sukrim]

If OpenCoin is so "open" why isn't their source open yet?

Anyone with closed source code can claim whatever they want with no real proof.

Why not open the source so the truth of how ripple is truly structure in the code is exposed? This reminds me of solidcoin 2 and micro cash which was closed source.

Have you actually tried to get access to their server code or are you just reiterating over and over the same "arguments"? Will you change your stance once they are providing an Open Source server implementation?

Oh, also where are the source files for the ASICs being sold and which make up a major part of the Bitcoin network by now? What's to stop them taking over the network by 1.1.2014?

[smoothie]

If OpenCoin is so "open" why isn't their source open yet?

Anyone with closed source code can claim whatever they want with no real proof.

Why not open the source so the truth of how ripple is truly structure in the code is exposed? This reminds me of solidcoin 2 and micro cash which was closed source.

Have you actually tried to get access to their server code or are you just reiterating over and over the same "arguments"? Will you change your stance once they are providing an Open Source server implementation?

Oh, also where are the source files for the ASICs being sold and which make up a major part of the Bitcoin network by now? What's to stop them taking over the network by 1.1.2014?

1. I will have to review the open source code once released.

2. Comparing ASICs and ripple is pretty far stretch. Lets compare bitcoin and ripple. One is open sourced and the other isn't. One is centrally controlled and the other isn't.

[SGExodus]

Have you actually tried to get access to their server code or are you just reiterating over and over the same "arguments"? Will you change your stance once they are providing an Open Source server implementation?

Don't be silly.   Why would a for-profit organisation ever release the server implementation?  Where people will fork immediately and all their effort to scam the world with 100 billion premined XRP goes down the drain.

[Sukrim]

Have you actually tried to get access to their server code or are you just reiterating over and over the same "arguments"? Will you change your stance once they are providing an Open Source server implementation?

Don't be silly.   Why would a for-profit organisation ever release the server implementation?  Where people will fork immediately and all their effort to scam the world with 100 billion premined XRP goes down the drain.

Well, as soon as there is a non-XRP fork with more than just a little attention, it is likely to be transaction-spammed into oblivion. XRP serve the same purpose as standard tape transactions and block size limits in Bitcoin: They are anti spam measurements. Also there is the expressed intent of OpenCoin to release the code.


About ASICs: They actually DO run the Bitcoin network right now. They run an open protocol (like for example HTTP) on a closed source machine (e.g. Microsoft IIS). You have NO IDEA what they might do in the future, no way of  making sure they will play by the rules in the future and in comparison to OpenCoin no expressed intention at all by ASIC manufactureres to ever release any of their schematics.

The Ripple client (and some 3rd party re-implementations of it) is already open source, much like Bitcoin and the Bitcoin protocol itself. The validator (=server) code is as closed as are ASICs.

Ripple is already documented well enough that you might even start wirting your own server already. If you actually ask instead of crying about it on the forums, there is also a quite good chance that you get early access to their server code as well.

[cypherdoc]

Have you actually tried to get access to their server code or are you just reiterating over and over the same "arguments"? Will you change your stance once they are providing an Open Source server implementation?

Don't be silly.   Why would a for-profit organisation ever release the server implementation?  Where people will fork immediately and all their effort to scam the world with 100 billion premined XRP goes down the drain.

Well, as soon as there is a non-XRP fork with more than just a little attention, it is likely to be transaction-spammed into oblivion. XRP serve the same purpose as standard tape transactions and block size limits in Bitcoin: They are anti spam measurements. Also there is the expressed intent of OpenCoin to release the code.


About ASICs: They actually DO run the Bitcoin network right now. They run an open protocol (like for example HTTP) on a closed source machine (e.g. Microsoft IIS). You have NO IDEA what they might do in the future, no way of  making sure they will play by the rules in the future and in comparison to OpenCoin no expressed intention at all by ASIC manufactureres to ever release any of their schematics.

The Ripple client (and some 3rd party re-implementations of it) is already open source, much like Bitcoin and the Bitcoin protocol itself. The validator (=server) code is as closed as are ASICs.

Ripple is already documented well enough that you might even start wirting your own server already. If you actually ask instead of crying about it on the forums, there is also a quite good chance that you get early access to their server code as well.

Avalon has released their schematics.

[Sukrim]

Avalon has released their schematics.

Interesting, thanks for that info!
My complaint still stands with ASICminer and BFL though.
Do you have a link by the way, it's been a while since I was browsing the mining subforums...

Edit:
Both "+1" as well as the (opposite?) "lol" comments are jsut unnecessary spam, these threads get derailed already enough already as is...

[SGExodus]

Well, as soon as there is a non-XRP fork with more than just a little attention, it is likely to be transaction-spammed into oblivion. XRP serve the same purpose as standard tape transactions and block size limits in Bitcoin: They are anti spam measurements. Also there is the expressed intent of OpenCoin to release the code.

About ASICs: They actually DO run the Bitcoin network right now. They run an open protocol (like for example HTTP) on a closed source machine (e.g. Microsoft IIS). You have NO IDEA what they might do in the future, no way of  making sure they will play by the rules in the future and in comparison to OpenCoin no expressed intention at all by ASIC manufactureres to ever release any of their schematics.

The Ripple client (and some 3rd party re-implementations of it) is already open source, much like Bitcoin and the Bitcoin protocol itself. The validator (=server) code is as closed as are ASICs.

Ripple is already documented well enough that you might even start wirting your own server already. If you actually ask instead of crying about it on the forums, there is also a quite good chance that you get early access to their server code as well.

I have to take back my words for calling you silly, because you are a complete RETARD to even compare ASIC to Opencoin.   ASIC chips are trivial to make for anyone with a little experience with FPGA.  It may be costly to go through the wafering process if you don't have the right contact, but anyone can make ASIC.    ASIC aren't even new technology, it's been around in the semicon for over 30 years.

You don't have any clue between seeing the source code and being open source.  

Ripple should stop bribing retard like you to promote their system.  It's hurting them more than their badly written wiki and website.

[cypherdoc]

Avalon has released their schematics.

Interesting, thanks for that info!
My complaint still stands with ASICminer and BFL though.
Do you have a link by the way, it's been a while since I was browsing the mining subforums...

Edit:
Both "+1" as well as the (opposite?) "lol" comments are jsut unnecessary spam, these threads get derailed already enough already as is...

i know b/c i looked at them just last week.  i'm sure they're on the wiki the link of which i don't have right now.

[smoothie]

Have you actually tried to get access to their server code or are you just reiterating over and over the same "arguments"? Will you change your stance once they are providing an Open Source server implementation?

Don't be silly.   Why would a for-profit organisation ever release the server implementation?  Where people will fork immediately and all their effort to scam the world with 100 billion premined XRP goes down the drain.

Well, as soon as there is a non-XRP fork with more than just a little attention, it is likely to be transaction-spammed into oblivion. XRP serve the same purpose as standard tape transactions and block size limits in Bitcoin: They are anti spam measurements. Also there is the expressed intent of OpenCoin to release the code.


About ASICs: They actually DO run the Bitcoin network right now. They run an open protocol (like for example HTTP) on a closed source machine (e.g. Microsoft IIS). You have NO IDEA what they might do in the future, no way of  making sure they will play by the rules in the future and in comparison to OpenCoin no expressed intention at all by ASIC manufactureres to ever release any of their schematics.

The Ripple client (and some 3rd party re-implementations of it) is already open source, much like Bitcoin and the Bitcoin protocol itself. The validator (=server) code is as closed as are ASICs.

Ripple is already documented well enough that you might even start wirting your own server already. If you actually ask instead of crying about it on the forums, there is also a quite good chance that you get early access to their server code as well.

That's the issue. No one should HAVE to ask for the source if indeed the intention of the developers was to release it.

Satoshi didn't wait until someone asked for it in order for him to publicly post it.

Ripple is a business. Them releasing their source would be like Microsoft or any large software company releasing their code to the public which would make their product now worth a lot less because everyone could get their product for free essentially.

[Sukrim]

I have to take back my words for calling you silly, because you are a complete RETARD to even compare ASIC to Opencoin.
[snip]
Ripple should stop bribing retard like you to promote their system.  It's hurting them more than their badly written wiki and website.

*sigh*

The only people who I know of that received money to voice their opinion about Ripple are the ones paid by the operator(s) of the page "ripplescam.org". All XRP that I received were in the giveaway with no strings attached and I choose my words freely (both as in freedom and free beer...).

Creating a Ripple system is also not too difficult and the implementation by OpenCoin is also not the first one in existence. I am simply saying that ASICs are (mostly, as Avalon apparently released their sources) even more closed than OpenCoin and they are running Bitcoin right now. It doesn't matter if they are easy to make or hard to come by, at the moment most likely more than 50% of mining power is in the hands of advanced closed source chips and no matter how distributed and open the protocol above them is, there is a greater than 0 chance that these devices contain (intentionally or not) malicious code (in the form of synthesized hardware) that can severely harm the Bitcoin network.

i know b/c i looked at them just last week.  i'm sure they're on the wiki the link of which i don't have right now.

Seems like they have a repo at github: https://github.com/BitSyncom/avalon-ref
From there (emphasis mine):

current version of FPGA bitstream contains licensed parts we can not open source at the moment, a licensed free version is being worked on that will be released in the future.

Looks like they have similar issues to OpenCoin (though probably rather library related, not hard fork/network rules related).
Anyways, thanks for the heads up, interesting stuff nevertheless!

[JoelKatz]

1.  if XRP's are being destroyed with every tx and there is only ever going to be the fixed supply, then what happens to Ripple when all the XRP have been destroyed?

You're talking hunreds of years down the road, maybe thousands. But if that ever happens, the stakeholders at that time might make XRP more divisible, they might make every XRP into 1,000 "new-XRP". Who knows, they might even make more XRP. People in the future can solve their problems however they think is best.

2.  as the value of XRP gets pushed higher and higher via destruction, won't tx fees eventually become so huge as to be uneconomical for funding tx's?

No, because the community will probably drop them by consensus. But, yes, if people want that to happen, then it will happen. Nothing can stop people from doing dumb things if they want to.

3.  won't OpenCoin eventually perform a dump of their XRP holdings to cash out? (he acknowledged that)

Why? Dumping will push the price way down. That doesn't make economic sense. Yes, OpenCoin could do that, but it would be against their interests.

Larson can't have it both ways.  if he allows XRP's to eventually all be destroyed, the system will fail.  if he changes the rules and allows more XRP's to be printed then effectively he is no better than the Fed.

they are caught in a contradiction.

You are assuming OpenCoin will be a Ripple central authority forever. That is absolutely not our plan.

[JoelKatz]

If OpenCoin is so "open" why isn't their source open yet?

Because as soon as the source code is open, we have to obtain a community consensus on every change that affects the way a transaction is processed. That would slow down our development tremendously.

Anyone with closed source code can claim whatever they want with no real proof.

No, because code is not the only form of proof.

Why not open the source so the truth of how ripple is truly structure in the code is exposed? This reminds me of solidcoin 2 and micro cash which was closed source.

We will and for just that reason. We have a list of things that need to get done before the server code can be open sourced and we're running down that list as quickly as we can.

[HostFat]

Ripple is a business. Them releasing their source would be like Microsoft or any large software company releasing their code to the public which would make their product now worth a lot less because everyone could get their product for free essentially.

It's different.
Microsoft is taking money by selling his products.
OpenCoin isn't making money on this way, they will making money from XRP.
XRP will incresse their value by incresing adoption of Ripple. This is why Ripple is distributed "free".

The only thing that they will NOT distribute are their private keys of their accounts.

There are two resons so that it is still NOT opensource now:

- It will be a p2p decentralised network.
It's really hard to add features on a decentralised network, as it is now with Bitcoin (many big features are hard to add because they need hard forks)
Their are still testing it and adding other features.

- They are a business company, they need to take money from their work.
So they need to make their network big enough so that other clone-networks will not take too much space on the market.

These two points don't change the logic so that they will release the source code on next months, because, I repeat:
The only thing that they will NOT distribute are their private keys of their accounts.

It's a really good business model, and they are making many people jealous for not being the first to come up with this idea
You should instead be happy for them and waiting for the completion of this new toy that they are making and giving to the community!