The difference between Ripple and Bitcoin

[hypostatization]

I see value in community members informing the broader Bitcoin community of organized attempts to mislead it, whether it be the history of Ripple detractors or MtGox.

I am not defending the communication quality of Ripple Labs.

but you are trying to defend Ripple and partial in presenting that. There's value in a balanced; rounded; and not partial, presentation of problems.

It helps your case when you remove my quote from context. I went on to say that the community, and not Ripple Labs, is driving most of the communication---as well as stating that Ripple Labs has lagged in effective communication. Ripple Labs can definitely be doing a better job; I am also optimistic that they are heading in that direction.

I have also been transparent about issues with the Validator network today, at multiple points, as well as WCG not being cost effective for most people.

I agree, in general, about the weak launch. Again, I consider market liquidity, services, and developer adoption more significant than XRP value. Basically, Ripple Labs emerged from stealth mode too early---and exposed Ripple to an attack campaign that they were not ready to handle. Ripple Labs is starting to gear up to improve communication, but it will take time.

Again, you're trying to make excuses.

I am not sure what excuse you think I am making? I am even stating general agreement. Ripple Labs did not effectively respond to the attack campaign. It was a clear misstep, in retrospect. I am also stating the launch was weak. In saying that they are starting to gear up to improve communication, I am also acknowledging that they are not where they need to be today.

My impression is that whatever Ripple might be, is not related to cryptocurrency as currency. Significantly then, it seem that XRP are not meant to ever be valuable in and of themselves. If all Ripple'n'Co. did was make that clear, it would avoid the naive user spending money on those XRP. Leaving people open to make mistakes whether by neglect or deliberate ambiguity, is essentially exploitation and should not be encouraged.

If XRP are meant to hold value, then what we know of the spread of them looks very suspect; if XRP are not meant to hold any value and they are to be given away to oil the machines of whoever wants to host a server, then that has not been made clear. Either way, Ripple support sucks at communicating what is intended, relative to other Bitcoin2.0 protocols who are doing that better and more openly. Consequently, all I've seen of Ripple, is pushing people away - people who should be the most enthusiast of all.

You will have a better understanding of Ripple, Ripple Labs, and XRP after watching this interview with Ripple Labs CEO Chris Larsen. Ripple Labs is direct about the technology and future plans.

[1714784660]

1714784660

[~Coinseeker~]

My impression is that whatever Ripple might be, is not related to cryptocurrency as currency. Significantly then, it seem that XRP are not meant to ever be valuable in and of themselves. If all Ripple'n'Co. did was make that clear, it would avoid the naive user spending money on those XRP. Leaving people open to make mistakes whether by neglect or deliberate ambiguity, is essentially exploitation and should not be encouraged.

For the better part of last year, members of RL's repeatedly stated (in these forums and across the web) that XRP was a risky investment and is not intended as a speculative currency.  What people do beyond that is there choice.    

If XRP are meant to hold value, then what we know of the spread of them looks very suspect; if XRP are not meant to hold any value and they are to be given away to oil the machines of whoever wants to host a server, then that has not been made clear. Either way, Ripple support sucks at communicating what is intended, relative to other Bitcoin2.0 protocols who are doing that better and more openly. Consequently, all I've seen of Ripple, is pushing people away - people who by rights should be the most enthusiastic of all.

This has also been made clear that RL's intends to giveaway 55% of XRP to charities, gateways, market makers and other entities that can provide utility to the network. 25% goes to fund RL's operations in growing the network.  The other 20% is for the founders.

 Other "Bitcoin 2.0" protocols as you call them,   are doing nothing but repackaging Ripple ideas and pushing vaporware to people who dislike Ripple but key difference is, Ripple actually works.  

I haven't seen Ripple pushing anyone away, in fact, it's been the other way around but at some point you have to stop banging your head against the wall and realize that some people just don't get it and there is nothing you can do to convince them.  Add to the fact that RL's is not currently on a general public/average user push.  That's not beneficial to the network at this stage of the game.  The focus is on the entities that will provide utility and in turn become trusted validators, as apposed to rounding up a bunch of amateur speculators, just to pump the internal currency. RL's is looking for stability in the currency and that requires volume based on utility, not speculation.  This makes cross-currency transactions much easier.

XRP may indeed be valuable one day but it's a long term, risky venture. That will depend on the utility of the network and whether people choose to move through XRP to facilitate transactions or will market makers just provide direct liquidity between currency pairs.  RL's founders are hoping for the former but not at the expense of the success of the network.  

*Give me a load of Ripple, maybe I'll like it more.. but why would you do that, if they are valuable? rJ2zDmzhxQNspB6RsxKgp8Ro1odEsACCEx

XRP are currently in the $0.015 range. If you can't afford that, you don't need a handout, you need a job.     Less than 100XRP can sustain over 50 transaction per day, for the next 100 years.  So, you don't need much.   

[davidpbrown]

You will have a better understanding of Ripple, Ripple Labs, and XRP after watching this interview with Ripple Labs CEO Chris Larsen. Ripple Labs is direct about the technology and future plans.

I've watched too many Ripple videos on the back of promise that they'll give "a better understanding of Ripple".. doesn't happen.

*Give me a load of Ripple, maybe I'll like it more.. but why would you do that, if they are valuable? rJ2zDmzhxQNspB6RsxKgp8Ro1odEsACCEx

XRP are currently in the $0.015 range. If you can't afford that, you don't need a handout, you need a job.  

I've got BTC to spend but no reason to do so.. I'm thinking XRP are not meant to have value and that the intention is they should be given away for free. I don't want to burn good BTC or any other coin for XRP while the use of them is so unclear. If they are being given away, then I'm happy to consider them and trial what they can do but that's a different model of distribution than finding suckers to buy them.

[~Coinseeker~]

I've got BTC to spend but no reason to do so.. I'm thinking XRP should not been considered to have value and that they should be given away for free. I don't want to burn good BTC or any other coin for XRP while the use of them is so unclear. If they are being given away, then I'm happy to consider them and trial what they can do but that's a different model of distribution than finding suckers to buy them.

They have been and are given away for free.  You must have missed their very first giveaway to members of this very forum.  They just aren't going to dump all the XRP to a handful of crypto-enthusiast because that does nothing to help fairly distribute the currency to the world and for Ripple, it's about the masses not the miners.  Eventually, this distribution will run its course and we won't have to talk about XRP all the time.  I'll honestly be glad when it's over because there is so much great about Ripple that people fail to see because of their "coin" blindness.

[davidpbrown]

They have been and are given away for free.  You must have missed their very first giveaway to members of this very forum.  They just aren't going to dump all the XRP to a handful of crypto-enthusiast because that does nothing to help fairly distribute the currency to the world and for Ripple, it's about masses not the miners.

Yes, your edit above caught me on the hop: "Less than 100XRP can sustain over 50 transaction per day, for the next 100 years.  So, you don't need much.   Wink" which is news to me.

I've wasted enough time on looking into Ripple to do more just yet, unless it's made very obvious. I'll return later then to consider it again.

[zachcope]

I think a lot has do with people simply not understanding monetary systems, payment networks, distributed exchanges, currency exchange and pretty much everything hypostatization just laid out.  Most people's extent of knowledge on these subjects is limited to what they learned from Bitcoin and thus, they can't see anything but "coins" because everything else is beyond their current knowledge base. Understanding "coins" is simple enough for even children to understand.  

The simplest way to understand the benefits of Ripple to Bitcoin, is to just look at Gox.  If Gox had been plugged into Ripple, users would had flexibility over their Gox IOU's. While an exchange closing is never going to have positive results, those IOU's could have still been moved into other currencies, like Bitstamp.BTC or XRP and then moved into any other currency where liquidity exists. This is much like what Bitcoinbuilder did, except you don't need a central clearing house to move your IOU's.  Instead, Gox users have taken a total lost because they prefer centralized exchanges over distributed exchanges.  Why?  IDK...maybe a few more need to fail before people finally get it.

Now no ones perfect and RL's is no exception.  Things can always be improved upon and the necessity to effectively communicate Ripple's feature set and benefits, should remain an on going process. But keeping blinders on and refusing personal responsibility to understand the tech in the space, is also not an excuse for not educating ones self on the tech, that brings increased value and utility to Bitcoin and all crypto-currencies.  

Ripple can bring the entire digital currency space to worldwide ubiquity and that's just a fact.

So you prefer contagion, bail outs and collusion when a large gateway/exchange goes down?
The incentives in Ripple push bail outs, debt and encourage other holders of Gox IOUs to turn a blind eye to Gox's trouble's, giving them more credit lest a default leads to loss of Gox IOU values throughout the system. This is what many critics of Ripple have said for years.

Bitcoin related businesses can never be too big to fail.
Ripple businesses can be too big to fail.

[Keyser Soze]

The simplest way to understand the benefits of Ripple to Bitcoin, is to just look at Gox.  If Gox had been plugged into Ripple, users would had flexibility over their Gox IOU's. While an exchange closing is never going to have positive results, those IOU's could have still been moved into other currencies, like Bitstamp.BTC or XRP and then moved into any other currency where liquidity exists. This is much like what Bitcoinbuilder did, except you don't need a central clearing house to move your IOU's.  Instead, Gox users have taken a total lost because they prefer centralized exchanges over distributed exchanges.  Why?  IDK...maybe a few more need to fail before people finally get it.

In your example, if MtGox was a gateway, ripple would have allowed trades of discounted MtGox.BTC for Bitstamp.BTC (or other currencies traded)? If the buyer of MtGox.BTC (who trusts Bitstamp.BTC) wanted to deposit their MtGox.BTC to MtGox , wouldn't they have to also trust MtGox? If this person trusts both MtGox.BTC and Bitstamp.BTC, doesn't Ripple consider their values to be equal?

It has been awhile since I deeply read into Ripple, so I may be mistaken.

[~Coinseeker~]

So you prefer contagion, bail outs and collusion when a large gateway/exchange goes down?
The incentives in Ripple push bail outs, debt and encourage other holders of Gox IOUs to turn a blind eye to Gox's trouble's, giving them more credit lest a default leads to loss of Gox IOU values throughout the system. This is what many critics of Ripple have said for years.

This has nothing to do with bailouts or anything else. Not even sure where you got that from. This has to do with me having control over my IOU's.  Why should I let a central entity have control over my IOU's?  So they can halt withdrawals and leave me stuck?  I could have moved into XRP, probably at some kind of loss, but still could have then moved into Bitstamp.BTC from XRP.  I'd rather have that option than total loss.  

Bitcoin related businesses can never be too big to fail.
Ripple businesses can be too big to fail.

What's a Ripple business verses a Bitcoin business?  That makes no sense.  A Ripple gateway is the exact same thing as an exchange, I just have control over my IOU's and you don't.  In fact, you do realize Bitstamp is the largest Ripple gateway correct?  How do you reconcile your statement with that truth?

[~Coinseeker~]

In your example, if MtGox was a gateway, ripple would have allowed trades of discounted MtGox.BTC for Bitstamp.BTC (or other currencies traded)?

Ripple "allows" anything of value to be traded.  Ripple doesn't put value on things, you and I do.  In order to make a direct trade for Bitstamp.BTC, there would have to be liquidty or someone willing to accept them, at whatever the market deemed was a fair price.  If there was liquidity from Gox.btc to XRP, you could have also made this move and from XRP gone into any currency.

If the buyer of MtGox.BTC (who trusts Bitstamp.BTC) wanted to deposit their MtGox.BTC to MtGox , wouldn't they have to also trust MtGox? If this person trusts both MtGox.BTC and Bitstamp.BTC, doesn't Ripple consider their values to be equal?

Again, Ripple doesn't put a value on anything.  You're saying (or whoever in your example) is saying they are equal. That's if you're talking about rippling through someone.  An option now exists in the client that defaults to "rippling off" and you have to actually enable rippling for that to occur automatically.

For direct trades...its similar to Bitcoinbuilder.  Some people have taken a risk on GoxBTC and maybe it will pay off, maybe it won't.  It would be the same in Ripple.  The IOU's will likely retain some value and if someone wants to buy them, they certainly can.  They assume that risk, just like the holders of Gox.BTC.  It's just with Ripple, you don't need a central entity like BitcoinBuilder to make these trades.  It all comes down to what you and I deem valuable and what you and I deem are fair prices to facilitate that trade.  Ripple just gives you and I a distributed exchange to conduct business, while eliminating the need for central clearing houses and centralized exchanges.

[Joshuar]

I've only heard bad things about Ripple..

[freequant]

The simplest way to understand the benefits of Ripple to Bitcoin, is to just look at Gox.  If Gox had been plugged into Ripple, users would had flexibility over their Gox IOU's. While an exchange closing is never going to have positive results, those IOU's could have still been moved into other currencies, like Bitstamp.BTC or XRP and then moved into any other currency where liquidity exists. This is much like what Bitcoinbuilder did, except you don't need a central clearing house to move your IOU's.  Instead, Gox users have taken a total lost because they prefer centralized exchanges over distributed exchanges.  Why?  IDK...maybe a few more need to fail before people finally get it.

So you prefer contagion, bail outs and collusion when a large gateway/exchange goes down?
The incentives in Ripple push bail outs, debt and encourage other holders of Gox IOUs to turn a blind eye to Gox's trouble's, giving them more credit lest a default leads to loss of Gox IOU values throughout the system. This is what many critics of Ripple have said for years.

Bitcoin related businesses can never be too big to fail.
Ripple businesses can be too big to fail.

This is a strawman.

Had MtGox been a Ripple gateway, it would still have failed all the same, except that until it did, its debt would have remained liquid and cryptographically provable. Liquidity of debt allows risk avert holders to sell the troubled asset at a discount to interested parties having different withdrawal options, willing to bet on a recovery or planning to take the legal route to recover the funds. Cryptographic provability of the balance guarantees that the exchange cannot cook his books and claim that he owes less than he really does.

[freequant]

I've only heard bad things about Ripple..

... says an account created two weeks ago

[~Coinseeker~]

Had MtGox been a Ripple gateway, it would still have failed all the same, except that until it did, its debt would have remained liquid and cryptographically provable. Liquidity of debt allows risk avert holders to sell the troubled asset at a discount to interested parties having different withdrawal options, willing to bet on a recovery or planning to take the legal route to recover the funds. Cryptographic provability of the balance guarantees that the exchange cannot cook his books and claim that he owes less than he really does.

Oh..I like how you worded that.  Very nice...ty.

[Joshuar]

I've only heard bad things about Ripple..

... says an account created two weeks ago

So, In order for someone to know anything about Bitcoin/Cryptocurrencies, they have to have made an account on bitcointalk?
There are other forums and tons of other ways to gain information, grow up.

[btc4ever]

local Bitcoin wallet = you hold the thing.

Ripple = you hold a promise for the thing.

MtGox = you held a promise for the thing.   now you hold the bag.

Coinbase = you hold a promise for the thing.

SilkRoad Wallet = you held a promise for the thing.   now you hold the bag.

Bitcoin Savings and Trust = you held a promise for the thing.  now you hold the bag.

MyBitcoin = you held a promise for the thing.   now you hold the bag.

Bitfloor = you held a promise for the thing.   now you hold the bag.

Cryptsy = you hold a promise for the thing.


Notice any pattern?  anything that stands out as different from the others?

I know which option I'm sticking with.

[~Coinseeker~]

local Bitcoin wallet = you hold the thing.

Ripple = you hold a promise for the thing.

I notice a pattern and it's one not based in total fact so, let's fix this shall we:

Bitcoin wallet = You hold bitcoin and it's the only thing you can hold.

Ripple wallet = You hold ripples and can also hold IOU's for anything of value.

I know which option I'm sticking with...both!

Continuing to paint Bitcoin and Ripple as competitors, only does a disservice to the entire community.  

[freequant]

local Bitcoin wallet = you hold the thing.
Ripple = you hold a promise for the thing.
MtGox = you held a promise for the thing.   now you hold the bag.

If you are a miner who got all the coins directly, never buys BTC for fiat, never sells BTC for fiat, and hodl, then indeed you better stick with Bitcoins in your local wallet and never touch it.
But if you are doing anything with your Bitcoins that involves trading it againts fiat, you can't just act as if exchanges were not a part of the Bitcoin reality, and you also end up holding a promise for the thing, except that unlike in Ripple that promise is illiquid and not provable.

[freequant]

local Bitcoin wallet = you hold the thing.

Ripple = you hold a promise for the thing.

I notice a pattern and it's one not based in total fact so, let's fix this shall we:

Bitcoin wallet = You hold bitcoin and it's the only thing you can hold.

Ripple wallet = You hold ripples and can also hold IOU's for anything of value.

I know which option I'm sticking with...both!

Continuing to paint Bitcoin and Ripple as competitors, only does a disservice to the entire community.  

Same thing here: from a Rippler's perspective, there is no Ripple vs Bitcoin, but Ripple + Bitcoin.

Only a fool would hold debt (whether Ripple IOUs or specific exchange IOUs) for an asset that he can withdraw / redeem in a matter of minutes and hold locally in a secure way. In this respect, even the most convinced Ripplers keep their crypto-assets safely in their wallets for long term storage. For these, there really is no point comparing Ripple and the other crypto-currencies directly since Ripple isn't meant to be used to store these assets but only to exchange them. Ripple Labs even went to the extra length of developing a bridge to make it possible to withdraw crypto IOUs to their respective blockchains directly from within the Ripple client. For crypto-currencies, the only difference between the classic approach and the Ripple approach is that short term storage of debt is safer in Ripple as it remains liquid and provable.

For fiat now there is no choice on either side of the line: you have to deposit your fiat and trust the exchange. With the classic approach, if you are doing arbitrage between exchanges, you have to deposit and withdraw money from each exchange individually, and need to trust each exchange to honor their debt. In Ripple, you can hold all your cash as IOUs of the exchanges or gateways you trust the most, do bank transfers in and out of these select few, and only deposit and withdraw the funds to untrusted exchanges when you actually need them there. That way you can still seize opportunities on sketchy exchanges without being exposed to counterparty risk any longer than the couple of seconds or minutes needed to complete the transaction and withdraw back to Ripple. In a world where all known exchanges would be Ripple gateways, one would for example be able to deposit and withdraw fiat exclusively on Bitstamp and hold exclusively Bitstamp debt while taking advantage of occasional arbitrage opportunities on sketchier exchanges such as MtGox or BTC-E. Another enormous advantage of Ripple in that case is that you can move fiat between exchanges instantly wereas it would take days with the classic approach.

[acoindr]

Let me ask all the Ripple supporters something. If there was a new coin created called ReallySmartCoin, and the people behind it said everyone should buy it, but when asked how many ReallySmartCoins existed they said well there is X amount,  um No.. you can't check for yourself, just take our word for it.

What do you think the community's reaction would be? Would you say people should support and invest in ReallySmartCoin?

If you answered yes please explain why.

If the people behind ReallySmartCoin said they were working on a way to use them to trade anything of value in a distributed exchange system, would you then support it if you answered no above?

[btc4ever]

It's easy to say that exchanges are just for exchanging and people should cash in and out quickly.  The reality is that there are costs in terms of fees and inconvenience (captchas, email verifies, delays) that make it difficult to do so.  So many people end up just leaving money on the exchanges.  And get bitten when they fail.   Is Ripple any different in this regard?   Is it 0 cost in terms of fees and near zero in terms of inconvenience to cash out my bitcoin IOU for a real bitcoin?

Otherwise, I don't see how that is much different from any of the other exchanges.... entities that I put approx zero trust in.