Ripple or Bitcoin

[timeofmind]

But really... Is Ripple going to come down to the user trusting a few servers? One of the primary strengths of bitcoin is that the blockchain encourages competition among nodes and provides an incentive for all participants. Where is the incentive with Ripple? Will it be left up to the big players in Ripple to provide servers in order to keep  the value of the currency going? In that case, how is it decentralized? If there is no mining of blocks, then it sounds like ripple would be unable to provide transaction fees to those running servers... where is the incentive? Nobody is competing for blocks!

[1714263760]

1714263760

[1714263760]

1714263760

[JoelKatz]

But really... Is Ripple going to come down to the user trusting a few servers? One of the primary strengths of bitcoin is that the blockchain encourages competition among nodes and provides an incentive for all participants. Where is the incentive with Ripple?

There is no incentive in Bitcoin to run a client. The only incentive is for mining, which doesn't exist in Ripple.

Will it be left up to the big players in Ripple to provide servers in order to keep  the value of the currency going? In that case, how is it decentralized? If there is no mining of blocks, then it sounds like ripple would be unable to provide transaction fees to those running servers... where is the incentive? Nobody is competing for blocks!

People running clients don't get any compensation in Bitcoin. The Ripple server is analogous to the Bitcoin client.

People will run Ripple servers because they want access to the Ripple network. Otherwise, they'll have to find someone else's server. People who run servers to provide access to the public will expect to provide access to hundreds of low-load clients, not a few high-load gateways, arbitragers, or market makers. The only way to ensure a reliable high-speed path is to run your own server (or pay someone else to do so for you). Then, people won't cut you off because you'll be pulling your weight and cutting you off would mean cutting themselves off.

Once you're running a server that tracks the network, the extra work to validate is negligible. It's just a few crypto operations to sign proposals and validations.

But I do agree that there is a real risk that the network could shrink to a small set of validators. I don't think anyone has any incentive to see that happen and I think everyone who uses the network has an incentive to see that that doesn't happen. We'd like to see a large number of validators around the world run by different groups with different interests, just as we now have a large number of Bitcoin clients running around the world run by different groups with different interests.

[Tywill]

Actually, friends are the worst people to lend money to. Money/business relationships should be left to the impersonal.

Sadly true.  Had to learn this a while back the hard way

[yocko06]

Actually, friends are the worst people to lend money to. Money/business relationships should be left to the impersonal.

Sadly true.  Had to learn this a while back the hard way

there are few people who don't ever default on payments. most people have good intentions to pay money back but at the end of the day money is hard to come by and people will always believe they can pay the debt that is to a friend of a friend back later. after all they don't even need to see the person, there is no human connection to make them feel bad about not paying them back. Ripple is a system that would only work people where robots that could not default.

[Tywill]

excellent point

[mmeijeri]

There's no such thing as a debt to a friend of a friend in Ripple, just debts to friends. And if you merely want to use it as a payment system, for instance because you want to use it as a distributed exchange for buying BTC, rather than for community credit,  then the trust lines will generally be reciprocal and the trust limits will be set to small amounts. Each person would extend the other a small amount of credit to gain reciprocal access to the other's network. Balances would generally even out over time, but could be settled periodically.

[MPOE-PR]

Hey, I'm not the one who lent Patrick money at usurious rates knowing that he was going to use the money in a business that was doomed to fail and then insisted I was doing him a favor. I'm the one who pointed the finger at you for that bit of stupidity.

Get lost, liar.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Hey, I'm not the one who lent Patrick money at usurious rates knowing that he was going to use the money in a business that was doomed to fail and then insisted I was doing him a favor. I'm the one who pointed the finger at you for that bit of stupidity.

Get lost, liar.

This, pretty much.

[Keldel]

Ripple is centralized and closed source. They need to start with that.

[runam0k]

Another ripple thread in the wrong forum?

[ElectricMucus]

It's interesting that the people arguing against ripple are the ones who stand most to lose, their main fear is that other people would choose XRP as speculative investment over Bitcoin.

[Coinseeker]

It's interesting that the people arguing against ripple are the ones who stand most to lose, their main fear is that other people would choose XRP as speculative investment over Bitcoin.

I agree to a point with this. IMO, it's deeper than that even.  This is an ideological battle between those who seek to preserve a system based on "anti-trust" (Bitcoin) and a system that is based on "trust" (Ripple). 

I'm betting on Ripple because again, IMO, anti-trust systems are against the laws of nature.  Humanity wants to trust and hates itself when it is forced to accept that the future can only be doom and gloom and everyone and everything is corrupt and untrustworthy.  The greater humanity in their hearts, does not believe this.  In their hearts they have hope and thus will not surrender to a system of anti-trust.  They will instead search for smarter ways to offer trust and I believe Ripple is that system.

Bitcoin has shown us the way.  I believe Ripple can do it better.  Maybe in the future, someone will do it better than Ripple.  In the end it doesn't matter who does it, as long as it gets done.  Regardless, when one bets on the good of the human spirit, in the end, all of humanity comes out a winner.   

[misterbigg]

I'm betting on Ripple

I'm betting on both! They are two completely different systems with different use-cases. The cryptocurrency pie is incredibly large and Ripple does not detract from Bitcoin nor vice versa. In fact, Ripple makes the pie larger!

Even though I can't stand the alt-coins, it is interesting that Ripple will also benefit the alt-coins since it will make them more liquid. You'll be able to spend your litecoins at any merchant that currently accepts bitcoin, when bitcoin "bridges" appear on the Ripple network.

What I keep saying, which unfortunately gets drowned out in the chorus of "scam, bla bla" is that Bitcoin users already have to extend trust! Except for the very few who don't use an exchange... See:

[Coinseeker]

I'm betting on Ripple

I'm betting on both! They are two completely different systems with different use-cases. The cryptocurrency pie is incredibly large and Ripple does not detract from Bitcoin nor vice versa. In fact, Ripple makes the pie larger!

Even though I can't stand the alt-coins, it is interesting that Ripple will also benefit the alt-coins since it will make them more liquid. You'll be able to spend your litecoins at any merchant that currently accepts bitcoin, when bitcoin "bridges" appear on the Ripple network.

What I keep saying, which unfortunately gets drowned out in the chorus of "scam, bla bla" is that Bitcoin users already have to extend trust! Except for the very few who don't use an exchange... See:

Excellent graphic and I heed your point.  I do believe it's possible, and have said so on more than one occasion, that Ripple is good for Bitcoin.  That the Bitcoin owners will look at their wallets value soon and say, "Thank [enter diety] for Ripple."  

I simply have personal reasons why in the end, my speculation is that only one will survive.  It doesn't make it true, it doesn't make it the goal of OpenCoin or Ripple, it just makes it my opinion.  

[cypherdoc]

I'm betting on Ripple

I'm betting on both! They are two completely different systems with different use-cases. The cryptocurrency pie is incredibly large and Ripple does not detract from Bitcoin nor vice versa. In fact, Ripple makes the pie larger!

Even though I can't stand the alt-coins, it is interesting that Ripple will also benefit the alt-coins since it will make them more liquid. You'll be able to spend your litecoins at any merchant that currently accepts bitcoin, when bitcoin "bridges" appear on the Ripple network.

What I keep saying, which unfortunately gets drowned out in the chorus of "scam, bla bla" is that Bitcoin users already have to extend trust! Except for the very few who don't use an exchange... See:

and what i keep saying and you keep ignoring is that if mtgox was shut down tomorrow Bitcoin would still function just fine b/c of other exchanges, localbitcoins, and p2p.  the POW will continue to incentivize miners to secure the network while at the same time not being a centralized point of weakness.

Ripple, otoh, will depend on centralized gateways (banks and other financial institutions) that, if you're lucky, will play ball with Ripple and submit to Opencoin instead of their chief benefactor the Fed.  and when they decide to change their minds, Ripple will be hosed.

in Ripple, there is no incentive for individuals to validate, unlike in Bitcoin they get paid as miners.  this is a significant difference.

[oakpacific]

I'm betting on Ripple

I'm betting on both! They are two completely different systems with different use-cases. The cryptocurrency pie is incredibly large and Ripple does not detract from Bitcoin nor vice versa. In fact, Ripple makes the pie larger!

Even though I can't stand the alt-coins, it is interesting that Ripple will also benefit the alt-coins since it will make them more liquid. You'll be able to spend your litecoins at any merchant that currently accepts bitcoin, when bitcoin "bridges" appear on the Ripple network.

What I keep saying, which unfortunately gets drowned out in the chorus of "scam, bla bla" is that Bitcoin users already have to extend trust! Except for the very few who don't use an exchange... See:

Excellent graphic and I heed your point.  I do believe it's possible, and have said so on more than one occasion, that Ripple is good for Bitcoin.  That the Bitcoin owners will look at their wallets value soon and say, "Thank [enter diety] for Ripple."  

I simply have personal reasons why in the end, my speculation is that only one will survive.  It doesn't make it true, it doesn't make it the goal of OpenCoin or Ripple, it just makes it my opinion.  

Yeah, tell me more why should I stop using IOUs issued by at least somehow legally regulated corporations, and join the happy lawless Ripple family.

[misterbigg]

Yeah, tell me more why should I stop using IOUs issued by at least somehow legally regulated corporations, and join the happy lawless Ripple family.

You shouldn't! Ripple users need to use the same level of care and discrimination choosing a gateway as they do in choosing an exchange (I think the wiki makes the clear, at least...I hope it does!)

There's significant overlap between gateways and exchanges. A Bitcoin exchange makes the perfect candidate for a gateway since they already perform the same functions. Ripple uses the term "gateway" as opposed to exchange because a gateway does more - it's IOUs can be traded in a decentralized fashion. Note that I'm not saying that the gateway itself is decentralized, they still represent a server where activity takes place (i.e. web interface to your Bitstamp account). But the IOUs are (there's still counterparty risk though).

Anonymous gateways are a bad thing! You want to make sure that you use a gateway which is a registered business, preferably in your jurisdiction. They should also have a good reputation.

[Coinseeker]

Yeah, tell me more why should I stop using IOUs issued by at least somehow legally regulated corporations, and join the happy lawless Ripple family.

Fortunately, misterbigg seems to be on the case.  He frankly has the patience (I do not) and the knowledge to field such "loaded" questions. I'll leave you gentlemen to it.

[oakpacific]

Yeah, tell me more why should I stop using IOUs issued by at least somehow legally regulated corporations, and join the happy lawless Ripple family.

You shouldn't! Ripple users need to use the same level of care and discrimination choosing a gateway as they do in choosing an exchange (I think the wiki makes the clear, at least...I hope it does!)

There's significant overlap between gateways and exchanges. A Bitcoin exchange makes the perfect candidate for a gateway since they already perform the same functions. Ripple uses the term "gateway" as opposed to exchange because a gateway does more - it's IOUs can be traded in a decentralized fashion. Note that I'm not saying that the gateway itself is decentralized, they still represent a server where activity takes place (i.e. web interface to your Bitstamp account). But the IOUs are (there's still counterparty risk though).

Anonymous gateways are a bad thing! You want to make sure that you use a gateway which is a registered business, preferably in your jurisdiction. They should also have a good reputation.

tl;dr No need to use Ripple, just stay with banks/exchanges.

[Mitzplik]

I dont understand why users would trust each others in the ripple network. The confusion is all about that.

Today, people trust in banks to issue IOUs (statements) and sites like mtgox (gateways).

If nobody trusts nobody except for the gateways, Ripple would be a centraliazed financial manager of funds in different gateways. In just one client i would be able to see and trade my funds (including BTC) in Bitstamp, Mtgox (if it becomes a gateway), gateway A, B etc. And the XRP will be useful depending on its liquidity and steadyness.

But if i trust any user, even if he is my dad, then I am at risk of belonging to an endless truted pathways network, just by my dad setting a trustline with a friend of him.

So, the question remains: why the hell would someone grant trust to a common user? To avoid paynig 0.00001 XRP or save some IOUs tranfer fees?