Say bye to ripple, prepare to say bye to litecoin

[RationalSpeculator]

I told you XRP gonna take off.

1 BTC is currently worth between 8750 and 5000 XRP. No end in sight....

And the argument is?

[ElectricMucus]

I told you XRP gonna take off.

1 BTC is currently worth between 8750 and 5000 XRP. No end in sight....

And the argument is?

It doesn't matter if the vast majority of it is in the hands of opencoin, it's the same effect with BTC/LTC/Whatevercoin and early miners.

And since it is truly deflationary it will replace BTC as a speculative asset.
Added to this is it is professionally implemented, fully accessible in the web-browser. That goes a long way in our times.

And most importantly it's gonna stay valuable even when Bitcoin plunges to irrelevancy since it neither based on it's source code nor a 'coin' as such.

[Buffer Overflow]

Litecoin has value over and above bitcoin because transfers are faster. In fact, there isn't really a reason for bitcoin to exist (sacrilege I know) once litecoin becomes mainstream, because it's the same but slower.

Feathercoin, CHNCoin etc offer no benefit over litecoin, however...

Translation: "I have more Litecoins than Bitcoins."
LOL 

[arsenische]

I think that Ripple is here to stay and it has a bright future. Though probably XRP is a bit overpriced currently, but they don't claim it to be a store of value anyway, they say it is just the means to prevent transaction spam, so its price doesn't really mean anything (I expect it to fluctuate a lot due to giveaways, media attention, technical problems, etc).

[ElectricMucus]

I think that Ripple is here to stay and it has a bright future. Though probably XRP is a bit overpriced currently, but they don't claim it to be a store of value anyway, they say it is just the means to prevent transaction spam, so its price doesn't really mean anything (I expect it to fluctuate a lot due to giveaways, media attention, technical problems, etc).

XRP is as "overpriced" as BTC was in early 2011 when it went to almost dollar parity.

[bitcool]

Debt, lending, creating out of thin air? Don't deal with those gateways. The gateway dividendrippler.com backs all IOUs with specie BTC/LTC/TRC 1:1 ratio. No BTC are created. While not supported yet, we can easily prove we control all BTC/LTC/TRC and the amount of IOUs are public information. It would be 1:1 ratio at all times.


Why does one need ripple?

What if you trust Bitstamp or DividendRippler more than the guy paying you in BTC? No need to wait for confirms, as all IOUs have gone through the process of confirmation.

Think how exchanges work: Bitstamp, MtGox, Btc-e, etc.. All have their own trading software, their own matching algos, and their own IOU system in place. All have their own rules for depositing and withdrawing. Little redundant, dont you think? Why not have a decentralized system that everyone can use? Now you only need a gateway to specialize in accepting and redeeming IOUs.

I don't understand. I'm sorry.

That's another problem of ripple: complicated.

Please explain like I am a 5 year old.

It appears you never really knew Ripple or Litecoin, and you wanted to say bye without even meeting them?

[arsenische]

I think that Ripple is here to stay and it has a bright future. Though probably XRP is a bit overpriced currently, but they don't claim it to be a store of value anyway, they say it is just the means to prevent transaction spam, so its price doesn't really mean anything (I expect it to fluctuate a lot due to giveaways, media attention, technical problems, etc).

XRP is as "overpriced" as BTC was in early 2011 when it went to dollar parity.

Maybe you are right.

I say that it is overpriced because:
1) its supply is potentially ~4762 times higher than Bitcoin's, and it is not clear how it will be distributed among users, and the issuer claims that XRP is not a currency, it is not intended for investment, it is just a mean to prevent spam.
2) it took 4 years for Bitcoin to reach its current value, there is strong community and infrastructure, it proved itself viable in wild but still requires much much development... whereas Ripple's sources are not published yet and it lives in controlled environment, and of course much less adopted than bitcoin

So I think 4-5K XRP/BTC rate could be a valid long-term goal... But looks like current price doesn't consider risks, it is probably just a result of the short term shortage of ripples, that can be caused by speculation (and can be easily solved anytime by OpenCoin).

[wingding]

Ps: Also note that the analogy made for litecoin that it is silver versus bitcoin gold is not valid. When gold was money, there was not enough of it, so silver was also used as money. There are enough bitcoins to serve the whole world.

Really now? That would only be true for a largescale adoption is BTC price was in the millions. Of course, 'early adopters' would be happy, but little sally would have to be content with her $1 satashi.

Perfectly right. But the bitcoiners intelligible argument is that sally's coin can be divided into a billion subcoins. What a relief for sally. (what economic problem can not be solved by decimals?)

[ricardo71]

I told you XRP gonna take off.

1 BTC is currently worth between 8750 and 5000 XRP. No end in sight....

Not today

[ElectricMucus]

I told you XRP gonna take off.

1 BTC is currently worth between 8750 and 5000 XRP. No end in sight....

Not today

Hopefully

[jlspartz]

Regarding ripple, I'm not a fan of large scale handouts and IOUs.  Sounds like the US government to me.

[cdog]

Ripple is a joke, please do not compare it to Litecoin, it really just makes you look clueless: http://ripplescam.org/

Litecoin provides real value and will ride BTC all they way to the top.

Ripple will be gone in a year or two. Its a bad idea that nobody needs.

[ElectricMucus]

Ripple is a joke, please do not compare it to Litecoin, it really just makes you look clueless: http://ripplescam.org/

Litecoin provides real value and will ride BTC all they way to the top.

Ripple will be gone in a year or two. Its a bad idea that nobody needs.

What a bunch of crap.

[destruct]

Yes LTC is dead.. Sell it to me now for $1 each. 

[scotjam]

My opinion on Ripple is that it's not needed. When you lend bitcoins or fiat, you are also creating debt out of thin air, and when the debt is repaid, it vanishes. Sure a system that allows you to lend/borrow bitcoins based on reputation might have it's use but such system does not need it's own kind of currency like ripple. The market value of ripples is crashing and for good reason I believe. Litecoin shares the same faith in my opinion. I remember a book I read at the time from Sony or Philips and there the mantra is, a new technology needs to have at least 7 big innovations for it to have a chance to succeed. Bitcoin has that over fiat and gold, Litecoin does not have that over bitcoin. Litecoin is a copycat with very few innovations over bitcoin. In a network environment where the value comes from the amount of participants, copycats do not have a chance.

From an investor's perspective the altcoins are like low end real estate. In a real estate boom it goes up even more than quality real estate, but it loses much more value when the inevitable crash comes. And chances are that it will never recover but will be bulldozered down, as no one needs it anymore. Whereas the quality real estate, although highly undervalued, will continue to stand as there continues to be a need for it. I might be totally wrong so counterarguments are very welcome.


Ps: Also note that the analogy made for litecoin that it is silver versus bitcoin gold is not valid. When gold was money, there was not enough of it, so silver was also used as money. There are enough bitcoins to serve the whole world.

Litecoin has value over and above bitcoin because transfers are faster. In fact, there isn't really a reason for bitcoin to exist (sacrilege I know) once litecoin becomes mainstream, because it's the same but slower.

Feathercoin, CHNCoin etc offer no benefit over litecoin, however...

Did you even read my post? Please try to refute the argument.

I did read your post. I don't know about ripple, but in relation to altcoins I agree with your point in general, but wanted to make the point that actually some altcoins have advantages over bitcoin. I don't want to refute the argument in general that some altcoins won't last, just around those altcoins that have some real-world advantage (not just mining advantage) over bitcoin. As for reading a book and needing 7 advantages... not really (just because sony or some other company says it is so, doesn't make it true - betamax? minidisc?).

One important advantage is enough for something to survive, but it has to be sufficiently important to a sufficiently large number of people. I would argue that speed of confirmations may well be such an advantage, not least because it also has a knock-on effect on security (http://www.reddit.com/r/litecoin/comments/1cssqr/the_math_why_litecoin_is_more_secure_than_bitcoin/ ). Is litecoin "faster enough" to survive? Maybe not, but then maybe there will be another altcoin that will take over. Litecoin already has quite a number of participants but time will tell whether it keeps them.

If you genuinely believe it's dead, put your money where your mouth is - sell it to destruct (or me)

[RationalSpeculator]

My opinion on Ripple is that it's not needed. When you lend bitcoins or fiat, you are also creating debt out of thin air, and when the debt is repaid, it vanishes. Sure a system that allows you to lend/borrow bitcoins based on reputation might have it's use but such system does not need it's own kind of currency like ripple. The market value of ripples is crashing and for good reason I believe. Litecoin shares the same faith in my opinion. I remember a book I read at the time from Sony or Philips and there the mantra is, a new technology needs to have at least 7 big innovations for it to have a chance to succeed. Bitcoin has that over fiat and gold, Litecoin does not have that over bitcoin. Litecoin is a copycat with very few innovations over bitcoin. In a network environment where the value comes from the amount of participants, copycats do not have a chance.

From an investor's perspective the altcoins are like low end real estate. In a real estate boom it goes up even more than quality real estate, but it loses much more value when the inevitable crash comes. And chances are that it will never recover but will be bulldozered down, as no one needs it anymore. Whereas the quality real estate, although highly undervalued, will continue to stand as there continues to be a need for it. I might be totally wrong so counterarguments are very welcome.


Ps: Also note that the analogy made for litecoin that it is silver versus bitcoin gold is not valid. When gold was money, there was not enough of it, so silver was also used as money. There are enough bitcoins to serve the whole world.

Litecoin has value over and above bitcoin because transfers are faster. In fact, there isn't really a reason for bitcoin to exist (sacrilege I know) once litecoin becomes mainstream, because it's the same but slower.

Feathercoin, CHNCoin etc offer no benefit over litecoin, however...

Did you even read my post? Please try to refute the argument.

I did read your post. I don't know about ripple, but in relation to altcoins I agree with your point in general, but wanted to make the point that actually some altcoins have advantages over bitcoin. I don't want to refute the argument in general that some altcoins won't last, just around those altcoins that have some real-world advantage (not just mining advantage) over bitcoin. As for reading a book and needing 7 advantages... not really (just because sony or some other company says it is so, doesn't make it true - betamax? minidisc?).

One important advantage is enough for something to survive, but it has to be sufficiently important to a sufficiently large number of people. I would argue that speed of confirmations may well be such an advantage, not least because it also has a knock-on effect on security (http://www.reddit.com/r/litecoin/comments/1cssqr/the_math_why_litecoin_is_more_secure_than_bitcoin/ ). Is litecoin "faster enough" to survive? Maybe not, but then maybe there will be another altcoin that will take over. Litecoin already has quite a number of participants but time will tell whether it keeps them.

If you genuinely believe it's dead, put your money where your mouth is - sell it to destruct (or me)

Thanks for your argumentation

What about the network effect? Meaning the value of the network goes up with the amount of participants?

Litecoin has faster transactions and if this alone is sufficiently important to a sufficiently large number of people then indeed it will succeed. But all those people look also at where can I use it? And then Litecoin is far inferior to bitcoin, even with faster transactions. So my argument is, for an altcoin to get those sufficient amount of people, it needs to offer many more advantages over the competitor. Comparable to facebook, windows, or ebay, the more amount of users, the more valuable it becomes and even with serious disadvantages over a new product/service, people will still chose for that due to the network effect.

One important advantage may build a niche market, but does not stand a chance to take over the far larger network. Many important advantages however do stand a chance to take over a much larger network.   

I don't hold any altcoins because of reasons mentioned. However, I was also resistent to bitcoin and it took time for me to see the truth in the argumentations. I might miss something in the altcoins too, hence this discussion.

[jubalix]

My opinion on Ripple is that it's not needed. When you lend bitcoins or fiat, you are also creating debt out of thin air, and when the debt is repaid, it vanishes. Sure a system that allows you to lend/borrow bitcoins based on reputation might have it's use but such system does not need it's own kind of currency like ripple. The market value of ripples is crashing and for good reason I believe. Litecoin shares the same faith in my opinion. I remember a book I read at the time from Sony or Philips and there the mantra is, a new technology needs to have at least 7 big innovations for it to have a chance to succeed. Bitcoin has that over fiat and gold, Litecoin does not have that over bitcoin. Litecoin is a copycat with very few innovations over bitcoin. In a network environment where the value comes from the amount of participants, copycats do not have a chance.

From an investor's perspective the altcoins are like low end real estate. In a real estate boom it goes up even more than quality real estate, but it loses much more value when the inevitable crash comes. And chances are that it will never recover but will be bulldozered down, as no one needs it anymore. Whereas the quality real estate, although highly undervalued, will continue to stand as there continues to be a need for it. I might be totally wrong so counterarguments are very welcome.


Ps: Also note that the analogy made for litecoin that it is silver versus bitcoin gold is not valid. When gold was money, there was not enough of it, so silver was also used as money. There are enough bitcoins to serve the whole world.

Short on detail, eg scrypt versus sha, coin number, confirmation time.

It like the navier stokes equation, the beginning parameters can have an entirely different outcome

[RationalSpeculator]

The market value of ripples is crashing and for good reason I believe.

It's the value of Bitcoin that is crashing.
Last week 20,000 xrp could buy 1 bitcoin, now you need less than 10,000 - the value of xrp has doubled against bitcoin.
You need to swap the axes.

(NB - I think these prices are completely irrational  - 7000 people trading their gifted xrp ignoring the other 99.7billion yet to be released to the public).

But Ripple isn't worthless.

I stand corrected. Thanks.

Why is ripple not worthless?

Why has it value?

What does it allow me to do?

[solex]

Litecoin has value over and above bitcoin because transfers are faster. In fact, there isn't really a reason for bitcoin to exist (sacrilege I know) once litecoin becomes mainstream, because it's the same but slower.

Feathercoin, CHNCoin etc offer no benefit over litecoin, however...

Translation: "I have more Litecoins than Bitcoins."
LOL  

Indeed. If Litecoin is to prevail over Bitcoin because of its 2.5m block time then Litecoin will itself be toast because Feathercoin and Chinacoin are both much faster than that. One or both of those would prevail instead.

Edit: Chinacoin at least with its 1 min blocks

[RationalSpeculator]

Debt, lending, creating out of thin air? Don't deal with those gateways. The gateway dividendrippler.com backs all IOUs with specie BTC/LTC/TRC 1:1 ratio. No BTC are created. While not supported yet, we can easily prove we control all BTC/LTC/TRC and the amount of IOUs are public information. It would be 1:1 ratio at all times.


Why does one need ripple?

What if you trust Bitstamp or DividendRippler more than the guy paying you in BTC? No need to wait for confirms, as all IOUs have gone through the process of confirmation.

Think how exchanges work: Bitstamp, MtGox, Btc-e, etc.. All have their own trading software, their own matching algos, and their own IOU system in place. All have their own rules for depositing and withdrawing. Little redundant, dont you think? Why not have a decentralized system that everyone can use? Now you only need a gateway to specialize in accepting and redeeming IOUs.

I don't understand. I'm sorry.

That's another problem of ripple: complicated.

Please explain like I am a 5 year old.

It appears you never really knew Ripple or Litecoin, and you wanted to say bye without even meeting them?

That is true. I don't invest energy into something where the first rationale is weak already. I debunked the first rationale in my opening post and if someone can show me that I am wrong I am thankful and motivated to research more.

I suspect for many people the first rationale to get started into ripple or litecoin is the idea to make a similar fortune as the first adopters of bitcoin. This however will not work if the masses do not join. And I don't think they will because of the arguments I gave in my opening post.