http://ripplescam.org/

[bitchess]

I don't care about any BETA, I want to see the code and the protocol in full naked glory.

Yes, we get it. You've said that enough it sounds like a childish tantrum.

You cannot establish any trust without that.

I'm fine. YOU cannot establish trust without that. Good for you! Off I go now! Bye bye.

Sorry, didn't mean to convey any tantrum or emotion.

I just want to hear how you have established trust in a system that is currently opaque.  It doesn't make sense to my logical mind.

[1714879430]

1714879430

[bitchess]

I won't use the beta.  What value is there?  I won't use ripple or Ripple until I see undeniable proof that OpenCoin is trustable.

I found it educational, and I was impressed by the extremely rapid, courteous and helpful response to a bug report I filed. It turned out I simply didn't understand the system well enough and that the alleged bug was not in fact a bug. I agree the system cannot be trusted until after they've open sourced the code, but I have high hopes for Ripple. If nothing else, it would be great for Bitcoin.

Again I won't waste my time until the proof is there.  Proof comes first for me.

[mmeijeri]

Fine with me, I was just explaining my own choice.

[johnyj]

I never bothered too much about ripple, since as long as you exchange with existing fiat money, you will have to cooperate with banks, that ruled out the possibilities of an unregulated exchange

Maybe for small transactions people could use localbitcoins.com, but when it comes to millions of dollar, your only interface is bank

I'd rather see some established foreign currency exchange join the bitcoin exchange business, Etrade, IB, etc...

[mmeijeri]

I never bothered too much about ripple, since as long as you exchange with existing fiat money, you will have to cooperate with banks, that ruled out the possibilities of an unregulated exchange

Actually, one of the great things about Ripple is that you do not have to deal with banks ever, if you don't want to. All transactions can be settled in cash with people you know personally.

[johnyj]

I never bothered too much about ripple, since as long as you exchange with existing fiat money, you will have to cooperate with banks, that ruled out the possibilities of an unregulated exchange

Actually, one of the great things about Ripple is that you do not have to deal with banks ever, if you don't want to. All transactions can be settled in cash with people you know personally.

Not for large transaction, for small transactions localbitcoins.com will provide a face to face exchange possibility

[mmeijeri]

Not for large transaction, for small transactions localbitcoins.com will provide a face to face exchange possibility

That is another possibility, but Ripple allows you to do this with people you know and trust, and it is accessible 24/7.

[JoelKatz]

Then don't use the beta. It's too late for that anyway, as you cannot currently create an account. I'm glad I created one in time, I had to jump through some hoops to do so.

We have no mechanism to stop people from creating accounts. An account is created automatically when it receives XRP. Theoretically, we could disable creating a new wallet in the client, but we've already publicly released a version of the client that allows wallet creation so that wouldn't do anything. I suppose we could ask Payward to stop allowing new wallets to be created, but storing a wallet at Payward is not necessary to use Ripple. You can store your wallet locally or, if you're a coder, use the account directly through the Javascript library without a wallet or using any language that can exchange JSON objects over a Websocket connection. The "blob vault" source is also public, so anyone could create their own wallet provider.

https://ripple.com/client/
Push "Create a wallet"

While the network is centralized, we could add mechanisms to prevent accounts from being created, delete accounts, freeze or adjust balances, remove trust lines, and so on. But we have never had any need for any of these mechanisms and so they currently do not exist. And, more importantly, we would prefer not having to having them. (And, as other people mentioned, once the server source code is released, any such mechanisms would just destroy our credibility and be removed by the community anyway.)

Were we to delete an account, change a balance, remove a trust line, or anything like that, there would be one ledger before this change and one after, both signed by us. Each ledger contains the transactions that justify the changes between the previous ledger and that ledger, signed by the account holder, along with precise descriptions of what ledger changes each transaction made. Every account state change is justified by a transaction on the other side of the ledger. If we were to tamper with any ledger entries, we wouldn't have a signed transaction from the account holder justifying that change, and this could be provably shown to everyone. (Though this wouldn't stop us from freezing an account by just not processing its transactions, though if we did that, presumably the account owner would complain loudly.)

[Red]

@joelkatz, I have a friend trying to active his wallet. I sent him 250 XRP but he says his Ripple client is reporting "Offline". He sent me his secret key and I can open the wallet from my machine.

Any idea what that might mean?

EDIT

How do I send the entire balance to another account and close that ledger entry? The wallet is not useful anymore now that two people have the "secret" right?

[Alex Zee]

How do I send the entire balance to another account and close that ledger entry? The wallet is not useful anymore now that two people have the "secret" right?

It seems that you cannot delete an account. At least, not yet. I am not sure about whether they plan it, I've suggested it in their forum not so long ago.

[Red]

It seems that you cannot delete an account. At least, not yet. I am not sure about whether they plan it, I've suggested it in their forum not so long ago.

Thanks! Just posted the same question in the "let's test it" thread. Oops.

[mr_random]

It's funny how the Ripple developers and shills on this board refuse to tout Ripple as a competitor to Bitcoin and say they are supposed to complement each other but in the news press lately people high up in the company are being quoted as positioning Ripple to be a Bitcoin competitor.

I encourage everyone that is anti-Ripple to make comments in any news articles mentioning Ripple about that 80 billion XRP the ripple foundation has awarded itself (80% of the entire coin supply).

[drawingthesun]

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.

Unfortunately this is hard to do and I can understand why ripple's switch being flipped is being delayed. Updating the protocol once the cat is out of the bag is rather hard, especially for Bitcoin.

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

What do you think of PPC?

[bitchess]

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.

Unfortunately this is hard to do and I can understand why ripple's switch being flipped is being delayed. Updating the protocol once the cat is out of the bag is rather hard, especially for Bitcoin.

That means you should sell out of all cryptocurrencies until it's solved.  That is my position.  Think about what complaints your girlfriend and all your future girlfriends would have with it that are not solvable without an upgrade.

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

What do you think of PPC?

Don't want to waste any time on non market leaders.

[drawingthesun]

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.

Unfortunately this is hard to do and I can understand why ripple's switch being flipped is being delayed. Updating the protocol once the cat is out of the bag is rather hard, especially for Bitcoin.

That means you should sell out of all cryptocurrencies until it's solved.  That is my position.  Think about what complaints your girlfriend and all your future girlfriends would have with it that are not solvable without an upgrade.

If your willing to accept very low or zero risk then what you say is true, get your money out of crypto!

However I am taking a risk that I am ok with. Bitcoin has first mover advantage so it seems like a good bet. I admit its a bet and a gamble but I am at peace with this reality.

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

What do you think of PPC?

Don't want to waste any time on non market leaders.

You state that a cryptocurrency with a  inflation mechanism could be more viable than Bitcoin, and you dismiss the only serious cryptocurrency that has inflation just because its not beating Bitcoin at this moment? If you really thought that a cryptocurrency with inflation would be a better option then wouldn't PPC overtake Bitcoin eventually?

PPC is a market leader, its the leading inflation based cryptocurrency.

Apart from adoption, what do you think of PPC?

[cdog]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagholder

[bitchess]

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.

Unfortunately this is hard to do and I can understand why ripple's switch being flipped is being delayed. Updating the protocol once the cat is out of the bag is rather hard, especially for Bitcoin.

That means you should sell out of all cryptocurrencies until it's solved.  That is my position.  Think about what complaints your girlfriend and all your future girlfriends would have with it that are not solvable without an upgrade.

If your willing to accept very low or zero risk then what you say is true, get your money out of crypto!

However I am taking a risk that I am ok with. Bitcoin has first mover advantage so it seems like a good bet. I admit its a bet and a gamble but I am at peace with this reality.

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

What do you think of PPC?

Don't want to waste any time on non market leaders.

You state that a cryptocurrency with a  inflation mechanism could be more viable than Bitcoin, and you dismiss the only serious cryptocurrency that has inflation just because its not beating Bitcoin at this moment? If you really thought that a cryptocurrency with inflation would be a better option then wouldn't PPC overtake Bitcoin eventually?

PPC is a market leader, its the leading inflation based cryptocurrency.

Apart from adoption, what do you think of PPC?

I actually trust the market to eventually be an accurate predictor.  Hence the best cryptocurrency should be popular (and stable) if it addresses all the obvious issues the people bring up.  Obviously I'm just rationalizing my laziness because the cryptocurrency competitive marketplace is not perfectly efficient which allows for hidden gems...

Anyway, took a quick glimpse now ONLY at PPC's supply description (I ignored all the other sections.)  "For many years annual inflation of gold is around 1-3%. In ppcoin there are two types of minting, proof-of-work and proof-of-stake. The proof-of-work minting rate is regulated by Moore's Law, which dictates that our ability in proof-of-work grows exponentially. We are aware that Moore's Law eventually has to end, but by that time inflation in ppcoin is likely already approaching gold's level. The proof-of-stake minting introduces at most 1% annual inflation. Meanwhile ppcoin's transaction fees are destroyed to counterbalance these inflationary forces. So overall ppcoin's minting design is still a very low future-inflation design comparable to Bitcoin. "

My thoughts are as follows:

1) predefining a number by which to increase money supply is arbitrary.  The challenge is to match money supply with money demand.  This is how monetary value is stabilized.  In the past and now, a centralized entity, the Fed, manages this delicate balance.  IMO, they are doing a decent job (except being slightly biased toward the stimulative side.)
2) no algorithm can easily predict the monetary demand.  If somebody is smart enough to create an algorithm to reflect this and incorporate into the supply algorithm, they solve what is likely impossible and also become the most important person in monetary history ever (even more than Satoshi.)
3) in the absence of #2, the only solutions are to either
   a) have a competitive marketplace where external parties modify the money supply by lending in a fractional reserve system
   b) have a competitive marketplace to control the monetary velocity of the currency, ie. the rate at which transactions can be conducted.  ((b) is likely a naïve suggestion because, it assumes that people's desire and timing to conduct a monetary transaction can be controlled at the aggregate level.)

The equation I am basing my opinion on is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity_theory_of_money

[Red]

Look!... I deleted all the stuff irreverent to my following comment and left only the link for those who care to look up it's context. 

   b) have a competitive marketplace to control the monetary velocity of the currency, ie. the rate at which transactions can be conducted.  ((b) is likely a naïve suggestion because, it assumes that people's desire and timing to conduct a monetary transaction can be controlled at the aggregate level.)

The equation I am basing my opinion on is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity_theory_of_money

I totally agree with you're logic. Been thinking about this problem for almost 4 years. That is what the [StableCoin] topic is all about.

Your "(b) is likely a naïve suggestion" is probably true in terms of fiat currencies and the world at large.

However, I do believe it is possible in a Coin based ecosystem. In fact, I think I have a stable & practical solution to "(b)" (in terms of an alt-coin) worked out.

[Red]

3) in the absence of #2, the only solutions are to either
   a) have a competitive marketplace where external parties modify the money supply by lending in a fractional reserve system

I encourage you to create a thread with your ideas on 3a. I'd love to hear them. If you do please put [StableCoin] somewhere in the title so I will notice it when I search for new concepts.

[drawingthesun]

  a) have a competitive marketplace where external parties modify the money supply by lending in a fractional reserve system
   b) have a competitive marketplace to control the monetary velocity of the currency, ie. the rate at which transactions can be conducted.  ((b) is likely a naïve suggestion because, it assumes that people's desire and timing to conduct a monetary transaction can be controlled at the aggregate level.)

The equation I am basing my opinion on is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity_theory_of_money

Lets assume getting the code to simulate correct inflation amounts based on various factors is either too difficult or if controlled by third parties, becomes too easy to gain. What would you prefer as a chosen inflation amount, a fixed number that cannot be gamed?

If you had to chose, 1%, 2%, 3% or even more percents a year? If the only option was to hard code an inflation figure in. Or do you believe that to be pointless and as bad as the current model of 0% in the Bitcoin world.