Why Ripple™ is against everything Bitcoin

[Coinseeker]

I've read every post in this thread and what's really sad is the most intelligent arguments are coming from the Ripple side, while childish attacks with little to no substance is mostly what I see from the Bitcoin side.  (Seems to be a common trend around many parts of this forum.)  I came to crypto via Bitcoin and with all the problems Bitcoin faces, it's the "cult-like" followers who dismiss logic and reason, that is a real turn off.  True it would be hard to destroy Bitcoin but it's not difficult to render in utterly useless to the masses.  The government can do that anytime it wishes.  That's the greatest risk to Bitcoin.  

Here comes Ripple, seeming to want to bridge the divide, so to speak and make crypto and fiat conversion MUCH simpler and cheaper for the average user and it's getting trashed before it even leaves beta. This to me looks like a good thing for Bitcoin and ironically probably it's savior.

Look, healthy skepticism is good.  It holds people accountable but how can it be a scam if it hasn't even had a chance to honor or break it's promises.     Let them come out of beta (not that any of you can prevent that) and then make rational arguments on why they have failed to honor their commitments.  Until then, it is obvious to anyone half way paying attention that the attacks on Ripple have nothing to do with Ripple and everything to do with the "Bitcoin Cult" feeling threatened by the mere mention of Ripple.  

I'd say...Ripple must be doing something right and thus my focus on Ripple only grows stronger.  What I believe is crypto is here to stay.  Bitcoin I'm afraid, I'm not so sure.  Since I've invested a little into Bitcoin, that really doesn't make me feel too great.    I hope the Bitcoin cult gets it together because this nasty, dismissive rhetoric is a slippery slope into a razor blade and alcohol bath.

[misterbigg]

...it's the "cult-like" followers who dismiss logic and reason, that is a real turn off.

Great observation. What is ironic is that so-called "libertarians" get angry because a for-profit company wants to make money in the space. Seems they have more of a Marxist bent than anything else.

I've been to the Ripple meetup and met the developers, saw the work that they are doing and Ripple is anything but a scam. Those who poo-poo Ripple, claim it doesn't work, and make disparaging comments without even bothering to do any real research, will be in for quite a shock soon :-)

Ripple will provide immediate benefits to Bitcoin. For example, the Kraken exchange (http://kraken.com) will make it tremendously easier to buy and sell Bitcoins, and Kraken accounts are also Ripple enabled. We need things like this because MtGox has a strangle-hold on providing exchange services.

[mmeijeri]

Ripple will provide immediate benefits to Bitcoin. For example, the Kraken exchange (http://kraken.com) will make it tremendously easier to buy and sell Bitcoins, and Kraken accounts are also Ripple enabled.

Awesome, I didn't know that. Have you had a look at Open Transactions yet? It looks great. I wish I had stumbled upon all this a couple of years ago, but to be honest I only got interested after I kept coming across newspaper articles talking about Bitcoin crossing the $1B market cap value...

[cypherdoc]

ok suppose a scenario where they hide a flaw in the network in the interest of pumping the value of their freely self-issued XRP?  how does that work out?

How would such a flaw work? How could they "pump" the value of their own XRP and not everybody else's? And if there's a flaw that undermines trust in Ripple, how could it not also undermine trust in XRP?

these types of manipulations go on all the time in the real world of stocks. 

its called insider trading.  insiders get first hand knowledge of a problem within the company and sell their stock prior to the news reaching the general public.  the same could easily happen with OpenCoin the way it's set up.

[paraipan]

...it's the "cult-like" followers who dismiss logic and reason, that is a real turn off.

Great observation. What is ironic is that so-called "libertarians" get angry because a for-profit company wants to make money in the space. Seems they have more of a Marxist bent than anything else.

I've been to the Ripple meetup and met the developers, saw the work that they are doing and Ripple is anything but a scam. Those who poo-poo Ripple, claim it doesn't work, and make disparaging comments without even bothering to do any real research, will be in for quite a shock soon :-)

Ok, you've done a great job! Now go tell your boss everything goes according to plan and everyone will start using Ripme, or however you call it, in no time.

[Coinseeker]

...it's the "cult-like" followers who dismiss logic and reason, that is a real turn off.

Great observation. What is ironic is that so-called "libertarians" get angry because a for-profit company wants to make money in the space. Seems they have more of a Marxist bent than anything else.

   Even better observation.  

I've been to the Ripple meetup and met the developers, saw the work that they are doing and Ripple is anything but a scam. Those who poo-poo Ripple, claim it doesn't work, and make disparaging comments without even bothering to do any real research, will be in for quite a shock soon :-)

Would love to have been there.  Wonder if they have anything coming to Miami.  

Ripple will provide immediate benefits to Bitcoin. For example, the Kraken exchange (http://kraken.com) will make it tremendously easier to buy and sell Bitcoins, and Kraken accounts are also Ripple enabled. We need things like this because MtGox has a strangle-hold on providing exchange services.

+! on the heads up.  I'll be looking it that.  Says public beta...may have to give it a test drive.  Not hard for me to try anything other than Gox.  That's an easy sell.  

[xavier]

The only coins that Satoshi arguably premined are those from the genesis block, but they are forever unspendable. Afterwards he released the code, and spread the news to as many places as possible, with hundreds of people got in contact with Bitcoin, Hal Finney for one mined several thousand. The only reason that it's Satoshi who mined 1M bitcoins, not someone else is we are all suckers who couldn't see the value of this thing, had anyone of the early adopter kept their miners running all day for half a year they would have been ridiculously rich now. Even if Satoshi had spent millions of dollars to get a Bitcoin ad running on Time Square 24 hours a day I doubt there would have been more than a few miners during the whole period. And Satoshi actually needed to keep his miner running because he must be ready for any new joiner of the network, there must be two nodes or it's not a network.

Compare that to Opencoin, did they ever give any chance for anyone to get hold of that 20% of XRPs? The fact that some Ripplers mentioned these two in the same breath shows just how twisted their minds are.

RE: Oakpacific

This is some great analysis that makes these forums worth reading. I will be sure to follow more your posts in the future and I hope to hear more of this analysis. It's some of the best available on these forums. Imo, it's interesting how everyone has access to the same information (in this case about Ripple), but only a few are able to extract the real truth. Thanks for posting this.

I believe it is possible to see a little about Opencoin through their current approach, even if the majority of their business remains a closed-source mystery, as outlined in this analysis by Oakpacific.

One thing though, let's not get ahead of ourselves analysing Opencoin before they even release the source code. There is no way it is sensible to buy XRP until you have seen the source code of the system. As somebody mentioned , anything can be changed between now and when they release the code.

However, I'd speculate (*speculate* in bold underline) alongside Oakpacific that the fact that they have taken this approach, developing the code closed source initially, and keeping a large number of coins for themselves, does not bode well for a cryptocurrency company, which after all will have to rely on a free and open community to run and support its software in order to succeed. However, jury's out.

[cypherdoc]

I've read every post in this thread and what's really sad is the most intelligent arguments are coming from the Ripple side, while childish attacks with little to no substance is mostly what I see from the Bitcoin side.  (Seems to be a common trend around many parts of this forum.)  I came to crypto via Bitcoin and with all the problems Bitcoin faces, it's the "cult-like" followers who dismiss logic and reason, that is a real turn off.  True it would be hard to destroy Bitcoin but it's not difficult to render in utterly useless to the masses.  The government can do that anytime it wishes.  That's the greatest risk to Bitcoin.  

Here comes Ripple, seeming to want to bridge the divide, so to speak and make crypto and fiat conversion MUCH simpler and cheaper for the average user and it's getting trashed before it even leaves beta. This to me looks like a good thing for Bitcoin and ironically probably it's savior.

Look, healthy skepticism is good.  It holds people accountable but how can it be a scam if it hasn't even had a chance to honor or break it's promises.     Let them come out of beta (not that any of you can prevent that) and then make rational arguments on why they have failed to honor their commitments.  Until then, it is obvious to anyone half way paying attention that the attacks on Ripple have nothing to do with Ripple and everything to do with the "Bitcoin Cult" feeling threatened by the mere mention of Ripple.  

I'd say...Ripple must be doing something right and thus my focus on Ripple only grows stronger.  What I believe is crypto is here to stay.  Bitcoin I'm afraid, I'm not so sure.  Since I've invested a little into Bitcoin, that really doesn't make me feel too great.    I hope the Bitcoin cult gets it together because this nasty, dismissive rhetoric is a slippery slope into a razor blade and alcohol bath.

instead of waxing philosophical, why don't you specifically address the concerns everyone is voicing here?  like with some facts?

i'll be happy to be educated but no one seems to be providing any specific details, implementations, or code to convince us otherwise.

[mobile4ever]

I was waiting for something like this. I always wondered why I never got any real answers to; "How many people control Ripple?". Bitcoin is decentralized and only decentralized markets should handle it. This form of "decentralized" thinking will keep bitcoin being "bitcoin".

What do you mean "never get any real answers"? The obvious answer is that right now Ripple is controlled by OpenCoin and its affiliates. The protocol is distributed though and the software holds great promise if it is open sourced, as OpenCoin has announced it will be, and as appears to be greatly in their interest. If they are successful, it will be great for the ideals the Bitcoin community has been pursuing. Being skeptical is one thing, but many here appear to be out to stop it from being successful. That suggests they aren't doing it out of idealism, but out of selfishness, perhaps because they worry their stash of BTC will not make them rich after all. Actually, I think Ripple will be great for them because it will provide them with an excellent, and nearly impossible to suppress, exchange mechanism between BTC and fiat currencies.

This is a perfect example of a non-answer. I have no idea how many people that is. Even if it were the number 1000, its not enough people. For example, Wikidpedia is under the control of about 30 people. Yet they are affecting the thinking of most of those on the internet. Bitcoin is not operating like this.


Bitcoin operates under different "thinking". Its decentralized, as in no central point of usage.


Also:

From this:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1e4b9s/the_only_truly_secure_way_to_use_bitcoin_from_a/


Look where he says:

The classic create-a-currency-to-compromise-a-users-computer-attack is devastating

He is talking about Ripple.

[Piper67]

The only coins that Satoshi arguably premined are those from the genesis block, but they are forever unspendable. Afterwards he released the code, and spread the news to as many places as possible, with hundreds of people got in contact with Bitcoin, Hal Finney for one mined several thousand. The only reason that it's Satoshi who mined 1M bitcoins, not someone else is we are all suckers who couldn't see the value of this thing, had anyone of the early adopter kept their miners running all day for half a year they would have been ridiculously rich now. Even if Satoshi had spent millions of dollars to get a Bitcoin ad running on Time Square 24 hours a day I doubt there would have been more than a few miners during the whole period. And Satoshi actually needed to keep his miner running because he must be ready for any new joiner of the network, there must be two nodes or it's not a network.

Compare that to Opencoin, did they ever give any chance for anyone to get hold of that 20% of XRPs? The fact that some Ripplers mentioned these two in the same breath shows just how twisted their minds are.

RE: Oakpacific

This is some great analysis that makes these forums worth reading. I will be sure to follow more your posts in the future and I hope to hear more of this analysis. It's some of the best available on these forums. Imo, it's interesting how everyone has access to the same information (in this case about Ripple), but only a few are able to extract the real truth. Thanks for posting this.

I believe it is possible to see a little about Opencoin through their current approach, even if the majority of their business remains a closed-source mystery, as outlined in this analysis by Oakpacific.

One thing though, let's not get ahead of ourselves analysing Opencoin before they even release the source code. There is no way it is sensible to buy XRP until you have seen the source code of the system. As somebody mentioned , anything can be changed between now and when they release the code.

However, I'd speculate (*speculate* in bold underline) alongside Oakpacific that the fact that they have taken this approach, developing the code closed source initially, and keeping a large number of coins for themselves, does not bode well for a cryptocurrency company, which after all will have to rely on a free and open community to run and support its software in order to succeed. However, jury's out.

Oak pacific has always been one of my favourite posters. Ironically, so is Joel Katz, but mostly from the old, per-ripple days. He had some fantastic mathematical and economic insights when it came to Bitcoin.

[Coinseeker]

I've read every post in this thread and what's really sad is the most intelligent arguments are coming from the Ripple side, while childish attacks with little to no substance is mostly what I see from the Bitcoin side.  (Seems to be a common trend around many parts of this forum.)  I came to crypto via Bitcoin and with all the problems Bitcoin faces, it's the "cult-like" followers who dismiss logic and reason, that is a real turn off.  True it would be hard to destroy Bitcoin but it's not difficult to render in utterly useless to the masses.  The government can do that anytime it wishes.  That's the greatest risk to Bitcoin.  

Here comes Ripple, seeming to want to bridge the divide, so to speak and make crypto and fiat conversion MUCH simpler and cheaper for the average user and it's getting trashed before it even leaves beta. This to me looks like a good thing for Bitcoin and ironically probably it's savior.

Look, healthy skepticism is good.  It holds people accountable but how can it be a scam if it hasn't even had a chance to honor or break it's promises.     Let them come out of beta (not that any of you can prevent that) and then make rational arguments on why they have failed to honor their commitments.  Until then, it is obvious to anyone half way paying attention that the attacks on Ripple have nothing to do with Ripple and everything to do with the "Bitcoin Cult" feeling threatened by the mere mention of Ripple.  

I'd say...Ripple must be doing something right and thus my focus on Ripple only grows stronger.  What I believe is crypto is here to stay.  Bitcoin I'm afraid, I'm not so sure.  Since I've invested a little into Bitcoin, that really doesn't make me feel too great.    I hope the Bitcoin cult gets it together because this nasty, dismissive rhetoric is a slippery slope into a razor blade and alcohol bath.

instead of waxing philosophical, why don't you specifically address the concerns everyone is voicing here?  like with some facts?

i'll be happy to be educated but no one seems to be providing any specific details, implementations, or code to convince us otherwise.

Fact 1 - Ripple is in beta
FAct 2 - Ripple promises to release the source code upon coming out of beta
Fact 3 - Ripple says it will be decentralized on the other side of beta
Fact 4 - It's a good idea for people to wait until they come out of beta before making definitive statements about their credibility and integrity.

[mmeijeri]

This is a perfect example of a non-answer. I have no idea how many people that is.

Don't be ridiculous, it's a crystal clear answer. Something like 30 people I'd guess, a hundred at most, and probably a lot less.

Even if it were the number 1000, its not enough people. For example, Wikidpedia is under the control of about 30 people. Yet they are affecting the thinking of most of those on the internet. Bitcoin is not operating like this.

Of course it's not enough if it stays like that. What makes it promising is that it seems unlikely that it will stay that way because it would be against OpenCoin's best interests. And even if OpenCoin doesn't deliver, others could, based on the same principles. Or using Open Transactions. The two aren't even mutually exclusive.

Bitcoin operates under different "thinking". Its decentralized, as in no central point of usage.

Don't patronise me, I know how Bitcoin works.

[cypherdoc]

I've read every post in this thread and what's really sad is the most intelligent arguments are coming from the Ripple side, while childish attacks with little to no substance is mostly what I see from the Bitcoin side.  (Seems to be a common trend around many parts of this forum.)  I came to crypto via Bitcoin and with all the problems Bitcoin faces, it's the "cult-like" followers who dismiss logic and reason, that is a real turn off.  True it would be hard to destroy Bitcoin but it's not difficult to render in utterly useless to the masses.  The government can do that anytime it wishes.  That's the greatest risk to Bitcoin.  

Here comes Ripple, seeming to want to bridge the divide, so to speak and make crypto and fiat conversion MUCH simpler and cheaper for the average user and it's getting trashed before it even leaves beta. This to me looks like a good thing for Bitcoin and ironically probably it's savior.

Look, healthy skepticism is good.  It holds people accountable but how can it be a scam if it hasn't even had a chance to honor or break it's promises.     Let them come out of beta (not that any of you can prevent that) and then make rational arguments on why they have failed to honor their commitments.  Until then, it is obvious to anyone half way paying attention that the attacks on Ripple have nothing to do with Ripple and everything to do with the "Bitcoin Cult" feeling threatened by the mere mention of Ripple.  

I'd say...Ripple must be doing something right and thus my focus on Ripple only grows stronger.  What I believe is crypto is here to stay.  Bitcoin I'm afraid, I'm not so sure.  Since I've invested a little into Bitcoin, that really doesn't make me feel too great.    I hope the Bitcoin cult gets it together because this nasty, dismissive rhetoric is a slippery slope into a razor blade and alcohol bath.

instead of waxing philosophical, why don't you specifically address the concerns everyone is voicing here?  like with some facts?

i'll be happy to be educated but no one seems to be providing any specific details, implementations, or code to convince us otherwise.

Fact 1 - Ripple is in beta
FAct 2 - Ripple promises to release the source code upon coming out of beta
Fact 3 - Ripple says it will be decentralized on the other side of beta
Fact 4 - It's a good idea for people to wait until they come out of beta before making definitive statements about their credibility and integrity.

ok.  those facts tell us absolutely nothing about what the final product will be.

therefore, being skeptical is at least as justifiable as being optimistic.  perhaps more so, as the fact that OpenCoin is holding back so many XRP's (fact) represents a conflict of interest.

[misterbigg]

why don't you specifically address the concerns everyone is voicing here?  like with some facts? i'll be happy to be educated but no one seems to be providing any specific details, implementations, or code to convince us otherwise.

Here's the problem: TradeFortress and his ilk are completely irrational when presented with facts regarding Ripple. There are plenty of posts by David Schwartz, chief cryptographer at OpenCoin, all over the forum (he goes by "JoelKatz") answering all these questions but they get ignored.

The main flaw in the "logic" of thinking Ripple is a scam is on the one hand claiming that they are going to get rich off XRP but then saying that Ripple is useless and only exists to defraud the public. It should be obvious that these are mutually exclusive possibilities. It is clearly in OpenCoin's best interests to follow through on their promises, and to make sure that the software lives up to all of its claims - to do otherwise, would undermine any potential value of XRP (the built-in currency).

People like TradeFortress would have us believe that OpenCoin wants to "control the centralized Ripple software" so they can make a lot of money. This makes no sense; How will they convince the public to buy XRP if the software is centralized and under their control? I'd be willing to bet that OpenCoin wants to release their source as soon as possible. Having control over Ripple is actually a liability. As long as the source is closed and OpenCoin controls the network, XRPs can never appreciate fully and Ripple is vulnerable to attacks from governments.

The real reason that people dislike Ripple is because there is something...lets call it a certain "stink" that comes from the idea that they gave themselves all of the currency, and get to decide how it is handed out. It is an affront to our sense of fairness. Bitcoin people in particular, dislike a premine. Given the experience of alt coins and their pre-mines, it is definitely reasonable to approach Ripple with a huge amount of skepticism.

What separates intelligent people from primates like TradeFortress is that the intelligent person listens to all the voices and draws their own conclusion from the information available (incomplete as that may be) instead of allowing their decisions to be ruled purely by emotion.

In my opinion, the OpenCoin developers deserve to get rich beyond belief if they deliver on the promises of their system. Ripple could be superior to Bitcoin in so many ways. Near instant confirmations, no problems with micro-transactions, no wasted resources going to mining, and no way to rewrite history via 51% style attacks. Plus it integrates better with the traditional financial system and oh hey, it has a built in distributed exchange. The benefits to society of such a system are so enormous - why shouldn't they get paid?

In fact, I much prefer that the Ripple software is developed by a for-profit company. Since they have a way to make money, they can pay programmers. They can hire PR firms, and lobbyists to make sure that wallet-holders best interests are represented. They can advertise, get investment capital, and make deals with banks. Compare this with Bitcoin, where the Bitcoin Foundation has to go begging for "tips" to pay the one developer.

With Bitcoin, if the core developers don't like a feature or they don't want to work on something that is important but boring they will tell you "it's open source, no one is stopping you from doing it yourself."

But with Ripple, in order for OpenCoin to make money they have to satisfy customers. That means they are more motivated to fix bugs. They will have actual milestones for the software. Release schedules. Paid Q/A testing. The OpenCoin business model is superior to the Bitcoin business model. Compare GIMP versus Photoshop. One is open source and developed by volunteers. The other one is the industry standard.

I'm still extremely bullish on Bitcoin. There is plenty of room in the cryptocurrency space for Bitcoin, Ripple, and many more future yet-to-be implemented systems. Ripple will complement Bitcoin and they will both enhance each other. Those who embrace Ripple will prosper, while those who foolishly ridicule it out of jealousy will end up missing the boat.

Disclaimer: I hold significant quantities of both Bitcoins, and XRPs. I'm holding for the longest time.

[moocowpong1]

<snip>

Perfect. Couldn't have said it any better.

[Piper67]

why don't you specifically address the concerns everyone is voicing here?  like with some facts? i'll be happy to be educated but no one seems to be providing any specific details, implementations, or code to convince us otherwise.

Here's the problem: TradeFortress and his ilk are completely irrational when presented with facts regarding Ripple. There are plenty of posts by David Schwartz, chief cryptographer at OpenCoin, all over the forum (he goes by "JoelKatz") answering all these questions but they get ignored.

The main flaw in the "logic" of thinking Ripple is a scam is on the one hand claiming that they are going to get rich off XRP but then saying that Ripple is useless and only exists to defraud the public. It should be obvious that these are mutually exclusive possibilities. It is clearly in OpenCoin's best interests to follow through on their promises, and to make sure that the software lives up to all of its claims - to do otherwise, would undermine any potential value of XRP (the built-in currency).

Not quite mutually exclusive, I'm afraid. It all depends on the endgame. If you believe the Ripple developers, then yes, they would be mutually exclusive. But as long as you can trade XRP for BTC, then it's also possible (with varying degrees of likelihood) to make money by defrauding the public with XRP.

I am quite agnostic regarding Ripple, and as mentioned before, won't touch it with a ten foot pole until it's fully open and decentralized. But what you're presenting here as a logical fallacy quite simply isn't one.

[grue]

I was offered $550 to say that "Ripple is a Scam."

I received an interesting message in my bitcointalk.org inbox today. It said that a user going by the name of 'TradeFortress' was paying forum members 5 BTC to edit their posts in this thread to say that, "Ripple is a scam."

Full article at link provided.

Ad hominem

[Littleshop]

MT gox charges a 1 % fee.  Ripple is not going to be a successful exchange while XRP remains as expensive as it is now or unless it takes less ripples to perform an exchange then it does now.  Maybe I am wrong but it looks like it is much more expensive when you factor all fees to exchange on Ripple as it is on the popular bitcoin exchanges. 

Huh? Ripple transaction fees are negligible.

I thought you needed 200 xrp to send?  That is currently more then $2 plus any exchange fees.

[grue]

MT gox charges a 1 % fee.  Ripple is not going to be a successful exchange while XRP remains as expensive as it is now or unless it takes less ripples to perform an exchange then it does now.  Maybe I am wrong but it looks like it is much more expensive when you factor all fees to exchange on Ripple as it is on the popular bitcoin exchanges. 

Huh? Ripple transaction fees are negligible.

I thought you needed 200 xrp to send?  That is currently more then $2 plus any exchange fees.

200 is the minimum fee to have a open account.

[Coinseeker]

I've read every post in this thread and what's really sad is the most intelligent arguments are coming from the Ripple side, while childish attacks with little to no substance is mostly what I see from the Bitcoin side.  (Seems to be a common trend around many parts of this forum.)  I came to crypto via Bitcoin and with all the problems Bitcoin faces, it's the "cult-like" followers who dismiss logic and reason, that is a real turn off.  True it would be hard to destroy Bitcoin but it's not difficult to render in utterly useless to the masses.  The government can do that anytime it wishes.  That's the greatest risk to Bitcoin.  

Here comes Ripple, seeming to want to bridge the divide, so to speak and make crypto and fiat conversion MUCH simpler and cheaper for the average user and it's getting trashed before it even leaves beta. This to me looks like a good thing for Bitcoin and ironically probably it's savior.

Look, healthy skepticism is good.  It holds people accountable but how can it be a scam if it hasn't even had a chance to honor or break it's promises.     Let them come out of beta (not that any of you can prevent that) and then make rational arguments on why they have failed to honor their commitments.  Until then, it is obvious to anyone half way paying attention that the attacks on Ripple have nothing to do with Ripple and everything to do with the "Bitcoin Cult" feeling threatened by the mere mention of Ripple.  

I'd say...Ripple must be doing something right and thus my focus on Ripple only grows stronger.  What I believe is crypto is here to stay.  Bitcoin I'm afraid, I'm not so sure.  Since I've invested a little into Bitcoin, that really doesn't make me feel too great.    I hope the Bitcoin cult gets it together because this nasty, dismissive rhetoric is a slippery slope into a razor blade and alcohol bath.

instead of waxing philosophical, why don't you specifically address the concerns everyone is voicing here?  like with some facts?

i'll be happy to be educated but no one seems to be providing any specific details, implementations, or code to convince us otherwise.

Fact 1 - Ripple is in beta
FAct 2 - Ripple promises to release the source code upon coming out of beta
Fact 3 - Ripple says it will be decentralized on the other side of beta
Fact 4 - It's a good idea for people to wait until they come out of beta before making definitive statements about their credibility and integrity.

ok.  those facts tell us absolutely nothing about what the final product will be.

therefore, being skeptical is at least as justifiable as being optimistic.  perhaps more so, as the fact that OpenCoin is holding back so many XRP's (fact) represents a conflict of interest.

Just as I never said is wasn't perfectly legitimate to have those concerns.  That's all fair but until we have a final product, I can't see how people are making definitive judgments against them and the platform.  I don't care if OpenCoin makes a profit off of this as long as it is as stated.  Just like I could care less if Satoshi made profit.

Now, the way it's stated sounds pretty good.  Again, I have to see a final product to know that this is for real but I will give them the benefit of the doubt, as long as they are clearly still in beta.  Not sure what's so hard to understand about that.