http://ripplescam.org/

[mmeijeri]

When you have more than one cryptocurrency this undermines the probability of success for the market leader.

I think it's a double-edged sword. On the one hand competition is good, on the other hand you also need critical mass. The ability to make payments in IOUs using Ripple looks like a killer feature that may allow XRP to establish critical mass very quickly.

[1714875694]

1714875694

[bitchess]

1) If Bitcoin copies you completely, you will go bankrupt.  Is this not true?

I don't think that really makes sense. Bitcoin is what it is. There's really no way Bitcoin could copy us without being something other than Bitcoin and people would still want the old Bitcoin.

I would expect OpenCoin to try to protect themselves somehow by inserting some hook into the system to protect their intellectual property.

Like Satoshi did for Bitcoin, right? No, wait, he didn't. You think he would have been richer if he had? Was Satoshi a fool?

2) Why don't you just take the issue off the table entirely then by removing ripple altogether?

Trying to adjust your behavior to overcome irrational objections from people who don't even care about the issues they're objecting to and who will just make new equally invalid objections when you overcome the ones they did made is a fool's errand. Ripple has a significant chance of complete failure and being able to give away XRP to drive adoption is strategically critical. And that's only one of a long list of reasons.

If you don't believe us, even when we say we're going to do what's in our own best interest, then so be it. Wait and see.

I feel like your responses are just based on rhetorics (if that is a word).  Can you please openly tell me why Bitcoin community cannot copy your open source code right after you flip your magic switch?  That is all I am asking you.  Theoretically, if they do, you will have no competitive advantage to Bitcoin and a smaller user base in an instant.

I know I sound irrational to you but I am sincerely looking for a clear response to make me understand why I am irrational.

[bitchess]

Concisely, if people sell BTC to buy ripple, BTC goes to 0 and ripple goes up.  This creates inherent instability in BTC valuation.

I don't think anyone can predict what some Bitcoin/Ripple future endgame would look like or even if there will ever be one. If you genuinely think this is likely, sell all your BTC today and buy XRP. Did you? I bet you didn't. Why? Because you don't think it's likely.

I didn't do so because I don't have any nominal BTC or XRP.  The reason why I am raising this as an issue is because it undermines the probability of success for ALL CRYPTOCURRENCIES including XRP.


The future endgame in my mind is this generic process:  

1) cryptocurrency 1 takes the market lead,
2) the masses buy cc 1 and feel happy to have this great advancement
3) cc 2 appears which is WAY better than cc1, the masses are seduced
4) the masses sell cc1 and buy cc2
5) in the process volatility for cc1 spikes
6) cc1 gets a bad name, and the reputation of all cryptocurrencies get incrementally undermined
7) go to #1

Furthermore, expectation of the above creates inherent volatility.

The excitement that I have with a formal replacement mechanism is that it prevents the above cycle and expectations of such.  To your point, I don't think proof of burn answers all of the questions on achieving this but the point is:

We need a mechanism to upgrade BTC is a way that kills volatility caused by the competitive cryptocurrency issue.

I could care less if Ripple or pipple or litecoin is BTC2.0 but don't do your conversion by relying on an exchange.

[JoelKatz]

Can you please openly tell me why Bitcoin community cannot copy your open source code right after you flip your magic switch?

They can and they certainly will. Just like Bitcoin spawned a dozen alt coins.

That is all I am asking you. Theoretically, if they do, you will have no competitive advantage to Bitcoin and a smaller user base in an instant.

We will have the first mover advantage, just like Bitcoin has over all the alt coins.

I know I sound irrational to you but I am sincerely looking for a clear response to make me understand why I am irrational.

You're not irrational. You just think we have a fear of competition. If we are not better than our competitors, we deserve to lose. We will be, just as Bitcoin is better than its competitors.

We need a mechanism to upgrade BTC is a way that kills volatility caused by the competitive cryptocurrency issue.

I agree with you that this might be a concern in the future. I have no idea how to solve it though. If it ever appears actually likely to occur, we'll be in a better position to figure out the right solution because we'll know the actual circumstance we're in. Perhaps people might agree to inflating the currency supply.

[Red]

FATAL ERROR! I didn't mean to slander Liberty Reserve. I meant to reference Liberty Dollar! I'm changing this post now... Changed. My apologies to everyone at Liberty Reserve.

I guess my point is that once the code base is released we'll see whether or not OpenCoin has any hooks in there to manipulate the system.  Their employees state that once the cat is out of the bag you can't put her back in, which I take as, "trust me once it's open it will be obvious we can't manipulate it."

Yes, I am 100% convinced, 1) they will release the source code, 2) they will not be able to *manipulate* the rules once they have done so. The rules will always be changeable (as they are with bitcoin). But it will require near 100% community approval (as with bitcoin).

The main reason I'm so certain (i.e. the Satoshi reason) is because the less the formal control Ripple has over the rules of the system, the better the chances they don't get prosecuted for forgery like the Liberty Dollar guy.

Also, I'm interested in seeing a concise answer to this question: how does OpenCoin plan on proving their inability to manipulate the ripple network while being able to retain control over the payment system?

That is the beauty of their plan. They don't need to manipulate the network ever. I'm going to answer this concisely in this post and I'll give an extended answer in my next...

Owning all the XRP (as they do now) implies that they can manipulate the market price of XRP at will. I presumed that they would do so in order to preserve a SteadyCoin like value for XRP. I just had no idea of what steady target value they saw as their StableTarget.

To me it seemed "intuitively obvious" their goal was to be able to have *external* USD/XRP exchanges, along with euro/XRP yen/XRP rupee/XRP ... etc.  People would physically give or electronically transfer USD to their preferred gateway and that gateway would exchange it for XRP that you would hold in your Ripple address (a la bitcoin). Then when you would send the XRP to another address (a la bitcoin). Then the person you send it to could convert it to euro, yen, rupee... etc. using their preferred gateway.

Duh! Right?

To make that system work pretty much REQUIRES keeping the value of XRP stable (SteadyCoin). Otherwise, people wouldn't be able to PERCEIVE their XRP as being EQUAL to USD. Again, Duh! Right? The *evil brilliance* of that plan is that maintaining the perceived stability of the system REQUIRES them to sell their boundless stash of XRP as necessary to compensate for increased demand for XRP as Ripple user base increases. Right? Brilliant! Right?

Wrong. It turns out thats how morons like me and Liberty Dollar would implement the system. They have a name for that in the USA. We call it FORGERY. The government has secret agents to put a stop to that. They're called "The Secret Service". Ask the Liberty Dollar guy.

No. What a truly F...ing, genius level, Satoshi level, BRILLIANCE would do.... would be... wait for it...

Convert from USD/XRP at market rates *and* XRP/euro, yen, rupee...etc. at market rates... wait for it...

INSTANTANEOUSLY! All in one, F...ing, single transaction. Holy Shit! as they say. It's Madness and I'm One Step Behind! That way Ripple (the company) doesn't have to give a flying F... about what the market rate for XRP is.

Better still, Ripple owners holding so much XRP give the perceptions that they can manipulate the market price at will (They can). Thereby reducing most people's urge to speculate in XRP (a la bitcoin). The fewer people who perceive XRP as equivalent to the USD the better for Ripple (the company) and its founders. The last place they want to be standing is next to the Liberty Dollar guy. The more people who perceive XRP as inflationary the better as well. Being guaranteed inflationary means that selling XRP can't possibly be perceived as an investment scam (except on this web site) nor as a Ponzi scheme.

There! How's that for CONCISE.

Conversely, how does OpenCoin prevent bitcoin from copying all of its features?

They don't. They don't have to care. To Ripple BTC is just yet another externally issued currency. Inside Ripple you can have as many of those as you want. I could be a Cheese Burgers gateway in Ripple if I saw a market. Someone in Russia could send 500 rubles to me in Cheese Burgers and I could take delivery in the USA.

Ripple changes F...ing everything.

[bitchess]

I agree with you that this might be a concern in the future. I have no idea how to solve it though. If it ever appears actually likely to occur, we'll be in a better position to figure out the right solution because we'll know the actual circumstance we're in. Perhaps people might agree to inflating the currency supply.

Great, you will be doing the world a considerable favor if you address this issue.

IMO, there are two major issues with all cryptocurrencies as of today:
1. replacement by a better newer cryptocurrency - there must be a formalized cutover mechanism that allows upgrades, this will allow continual improvement and avoid volatility associated with expectations of being killed by a younger sexier currency.
2. supply must allow inflation - deflationary spiral will doom any transactional economy, any cryptocurrency must either have a perpetual built in inflation mechanism, or banks need to spring up to lend the cryptocurrency

[bitchess]

Sorry this is not concise, Joel did better

In fact I find your response really hand-wavy and untrustworthy

I guess my point is that once the code base is released we'll see whether or not OpenCoin has any hooks in there to manipulate the system.  Their employees state that once the cat is out of the bag you can't put her back in, which I take as, "trust me once it's open it will be obvious we can't manipulate it."

Yes, I am 100% convinced, 1) they will release the source code, 2) they will not be able to *manipulate* the rules once they have done so. The rules will always be changeable (as they are with bitcoin). But it will require near 100% community approval (as with bitcoin).

The main reason I'm so certain (i.e. the Satoshi reason) is because the less the formal control Ripple has over the rules of the system, the better the chances they don't get prosecuted for forgery like the Liberty Reserve guy.

Also, I'm interested in seeing a concise answer to this question: how does OpenCoin plan on proving their inability to manipulate the ripple network while being able to retain control over the payment system?

That is the beauty of their plan. They don't need to manipulate the network ever. I'm going to answer this concisely in this post and I'll give an extended answer in my next...

Owning all the XRP (as they do now) implies that they can manipulate the market price of XRP at will. I presumed that they would do so in order to preserve a SteadyCoin like value for XRP. I just had no idea of what steady target value they saw as their StableTarget.

To me it seemed "intuitively obvious" their goal was to be able to have *external* USD/XRP exchanges, along with euro/XRP yen/XRP rupee/XRP ... etc.  People would physically give or electronically transfer USD to their preferred gateway and that gateway would exchange it for XRP that you would hold in your Ripple address (a la bitcoin). Then when you would send the XRP to another address (a la bitcoin). Then the person you send it to could convert it to euro, yen, rupee... etc. using their preferred gateway.

Duh! Right?

To make that system work pretty much REQUIRES keeping the value of XRP stable (SteadyCoin). Otherwise, people wouldn't be able to PERCEIVE their XRP as being EQUAL to USD. Again, Duh! Right? The *evil brilliance* of that plan is that maintaining the perceived stability of the system REQUIRES them to sell their boundless stash of XRP as necessary to compensate for increased demand for XRP as Ripple user base increases. Right? Brilliant! Right?

Wrong. It turns out thats how morons like me and Liberty Reserve would implement the system. They have a name for that in the USA. We call it FORGERY. The government has secret agents to put a stop to that. They're called "The Secret Service". Ask the Liberty Reserve guy.

No. What a truly F...ing, genius level, Satoshi level, BRILLIANCE would do.... would be... wait for it...

Convert from USD/XRP at market rates *and* XRP/euro, yen, rupee...etc. at market rates... wait for it...

INSTANTANEOUSLY! All in one, F...ing, single transaction. Holy Shit! as they say. It's Madness and I'm One Step Behind! That way Ripple (the company) doesn't have to give a flying F... about what the market rate for XRP is.

Better still, Ripple owners holding so much XRP give the perceptions that they can manipulate the market price at will (They can). Thereby reducing most people's urge to speculate in XRP (a la bitcoin). The fewer people who perceive XRP as equivalent to the USD the better for Ripple (the company) and its founders. The last place they want to be standing is next to the Liberty Reserve guy. The more people who perceive XRP as inflationary the better as well. Being guaranteed inflationary means that selling XRP can't possibly be perceived as an investment scam (except on this web site) nor as a Ponzi scheme.

There! How's that for CONCISE.

Conversely, how does OpenCoin prevent bitcoin from copying all of its features?

They don't. They don't have to care. To Ripple BTC is just yet another externally issued currency. Inside Ripple you can have as many of those as you want. I could be a Cheese Burgers gateway in Ripple if I saw a market. Someone in Russia could send 500 rubles to me in Cheese Burgers and I could take delivery in the USA.

Ripple changes F...ing everything.

[Red]

Sorry this is not concise, Joel did better

In fact I find your response really hand-wavy and untrustworthy

Such is life.

But let me point out that you should find my, a random stranger's, opinion less trustworthy than a founder of Ripple's opinion.

I really can't be offended by that.

[bitchess]

Sorry this is not concise, Joel did better

In fact I find your response really hand-wavy and untrustworthy

Such is life.

But let me point out that you should find my, a random stranger's, opinion less trustworthy than a founder of Ripple's opinion.

I really can't be offended by that.

I judged you based on the content of your post nothing else.  Trust me (and trust your own logic) that you have an advantage vs. Opencoin employee in terms of default trust.

Sorry, to elaborate, I was hoping you would back up your statement that you've researched the ripple protocols to the extent that it is better than bitcoin in every regard.  The key response I was hoping to get was, how OpenCoin proves in their protocol that they have no control over the network once switched on?  You came back with a lot of sentences talking about converting with fiat which I found to be unrelated to the original question.

[Red]

FATAL ERROR! I didn't mean to slander Liberty Reserve. I meant to reference Liberty Dollar! I
edited the post above to correct my mistake. My apologies to everyone at Liberty Reserve.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/25/us/liberty-dollar-creator-awaits-his-fate-behind-bars.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[Red]

The key response I was hoping to get was, how OpenCoin proves in their protocol that they have no control over the network once switched on?  You came back with a lot of sentences talking about converting with fiat which I found to be unrelated to the original question.

Oh! That question. Give me a minute. And I will respond directly.

Edit: My response will probably cause more controversy than the OP.

[bitchess]

The key response I was hoping to get was, how OpenCoin proves in their protocol that they have no control over the network once switched on?  You came back with a lot of sentences talking about converting with fiat which I found to be unrelated to the original question.

Oh! That question. Give me a minute. And I will respond directly.

Edit: My response will probably cause more controversy than the OP.

Don't stress about it.  By definition, you probably cannot answer it undeniably until they release the code.  If you can that would be interesting and controvertial (as you suggest.)

[Red]

The key response I was hoping to get was, how OpenCoin proves in their protocol that they have no control over the network once switched on?

Oh! That question. Give me a minute. And I will respond directly.

The concise answer is: it is impossible to maintain control through the code, when someone else possesses physical control of their own code. They could write some kill switch into the original code. Source code hackers could just comment it out and re-compile.

You can only maintain a "kill-switch" kind of feature if your product is closed source. There is not a chance in hell that Ripple would take that chance.

HOWEVER, my explanation requires a non-concise story...

[bitchess]

The key response I was hoping to get was, how OpenCoin proves in their protocol that they have no control over the network once switched on?

Oh! That question. Give me a minute. And I will respond directly.

The concise answer is: it is impossible to maintain control through the code, when someone else possesses physical control of their own code. They could write some kill switch into the original code. Source code hackers could just comment it out and re-compile.

You can only maintain a "kill-switch" kind of feature if your product is closed source. There is not a chance in hell that Ripple would take that chance.

HOWEVER, my explanation requires a non-concise story...

Once upon a time there was a company called MetaMachines. They created a little remembered piece of proprietary software called eDonkey2000. It let eDonkey's user's share files across the internet. This was not appreciated by the powers that be.

One of MetaMachines' founders Sam Yagan was called before Congress and made to promise to change his ways.
http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14518
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=e655f9e2809e5476862f735da10ac129&wit_id=e655f9e2809e5476862f735da10ac129-2-6

This just happened to be shortly after a critical bug was found in eDonkey. A patch was quickly issued and all users were requested to update to the new release in order to protect the network's stability.
http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=22682

Months went by and MetaMachines tried to placate its users that the changes Sam promised congress would lead to a much improved user experience in the next release...

Then, one day... Poof! Errors started appearing all over the eDonkey network.
http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=25999

A kill switch was thrown. One that was installed during the previous "critical update". MetaMachines' founders had cut a deal to avoid a long and expensive (lost cause) legal battle.

The kill switch caused havoc but it did not bring down the network. This was because a year before evil cloners, who hated MetaMachines' advertising business model, had reverse engineered eDonkey's protocols and released their own improved, open source, version they mockingly named eMule.

How do I know this to be true?

Sam Yagan told me the story personally.

So, this is the quiz...

What was the name of MetaMachine's other co-founder? And what does that have to do with this thread?

Sorry I still do not buy your story.  How do you have such a strong view about the code without access to look at it?

Are you just naive or do have access?

To elaborate, Opencoin could simply just require some pre authentication to a central server.  If they wanted to be surreptitious about it since being open about it would be "stupid" they would try to hide it in the code.

In other words, why pitch this view based on, "why would they even try it?" Basis.  Let's see the code and make final judgement.  Very simple

[Red]

To elaborate, Opencoin could simply just require some pre authentication to a central server.  If they wanted to be surreptitious about it since being open about it would be "stupid" they would try to hide it in the code.

Do you write code?

When you run a Ripple peer, every transaction gets copied to your machine just like running a bitcoin peer. If you have the code, and the data. You have total control. Unless the data is somehow encrypted by your secret server. But that would be detected as soon as someone ran their own Ripple peer.

What you are suspicious of, technically, cannot be done. Unless you are presuming that Ripple will never decentralize their system. (Ripple will own EVERY node)

In that case this conversation is pointless.

[bitchess]

To elaborate, Opencoin could simply just require some pre authentication to a central server.  If they wanted to be surreptitious about it since being open about it would be "stupid" they would try to hide it in the code.

Do you write code?

When you run a Ripple peer, every transaction gets copied to your machine just like running a bitcoin peer. If you have the code, and the data. You have total control. Unless the data is somehow encrypted by your secret server. But that would be detected as soon as someone ran their own Ripple peer.

What you are suspicious of, technically, cannot be done. Unless you are presuming that Ripple will never decentralize their system. (Ripple will own EVERY node)

In that case this conversation is pointless.

Do you have all the source code now?  Pls forward me the link

[Red]

https://github.com/rippleFoundation

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

https://github.com/rippleFoundation

Source code for the server is not released.

If you would like to contribute to RippleScam.org, send me a PM. I'm also spending a moderate amount on advertising. Send me a PM if you could help.

[bitchess]

https://github.com/rippleFoundation

so can you summarize how looking at the client code, you can ascertain that there is provably no way the server code cannot control overall functionality?

[bitchess]

https://github.com/rippleFoundation

Source code for the server is not released.

If you would like to contribute to RippleScam.org, send me a PM. I'm also spending a moderate amount on advertising. Send me a PM if you could help.

I actually don't have as strong of a negative view as you.  I don't care if Ripple can be successful.  I just think they should be mindful of the competitive cryptocurrency issue which plagues the entire market.  And they are increasing the prevalence of the issue.