Ripple vs Bitcoin

[Walsoraj]

Shouldn't this be Ripple vs Ethereum? Ethereum has a stronger development team and wider scope than Ripple. Bitcoin isn't even designed to do the same thing.

Stronger development team? Please elaborate.

[1714865331]

1714865331

[1714865331]

1714865331

[1714865331]

1714865331

[1714865331]

1714865331

[acoindr]

Sukrim, thank you for your apparently honest answers. I would ask people to replace "Ripple" with "Bitcoin" to see how shaky IMO it sounds:

It would be very unexpected to see that more than 100 billion XRP existed prior to #32570. With current transaction types etc. it is impossible in Ripple to issue more XRP, so the amount in #32570 is the maximum we know about

Is it at all possible that a transaction type existed before #32570 that could have allowed more XRP to be created, and then that transaction type was removed prior to ledger #32570 being published?

To be fair, you guys are asking me all the time about "theoretically possible", "at all possible" etc. - there are a lot of things "theoretically possible" in Bitcoin too.

Like what? That there can be more than 21 million bitcoins without a protocol change?

I hate speaking in absolutes when they are not justified (e.g. "there will be 21 million BTC" is provably wrong  ...

You're suggesting the common statement there will never be more than 21 million BTC is not justified, and is provably wrong?

I think you just destroyed your credibility. (it's not there will be exactly 21 million BTC, it's there will never be more than 21 million)

The older ledgers were lost because of a software bug by the way, not because of a conspiracy. There is a slow ongoing effort to still recover/reconstruct these old ledgers, so this might very well be just a temporary issue.

So the most important property in dealing with money, namely transparency of supply, experienced a software bug for Ripple?

[cbeast]

Shouldn't this be Ripple vs Ethereum? Ethereum has a stronger development team and wider scope than Ripple. Bitcoin isn't even designed to do the same thing.

This assessment is based on what exactly?

Anyways, I agree: Ethereum, eMunie, NXT, Mastercoin, Colored Coins etc. are the things you should compare to Ripple, Bitcoin is just something that is very well designed to be traded on these platforms.

Centralized platforms remind me of Liberty Reserve.

[Sukrim]

To be fair, you guys are asking me all the time about "theoretically possible", "at all possible" etc. - there are a lot of things "theoretically possible" in Bitcoin too.

Like what? That there can be more than 21 million bitcoins without a protocol change?

There has been already a protocol change in Bitcoin to prevent that a few years ago (there was a bug that could issue more BTC than what was intended).

I hate speaking in absolutes when they are not justified (e.g. "there will be 21 million BTC" is provably wrong  ...

You're suggesting the common statement there will never be more than 21 million BTC is not justified, and is provably wrong?

I think you just destroyed your credibility. (it's not there will be exactly 21 million BTC, it's there will never be more than 21 million)

Next time please quote me completely, you missed this part:

(e.g. "there will be 21 million BTC" is provably wrong - there will be for sure less than that because some miners did non issue themselves all 50 BTC in coinbase in the past)

I said there will be LESS than 21 million BTC, not more.

The older ledgers were lost because of a software bug by the way, not because of a conspiracy. There is a slow ongoing effort to still recover/reconstruct these old ledgers, so this might very well be just a temporary issue.

So the most important property in dealing with money, namely transparency of supply, experienced a software bug for Ripple?

When were the dollar bills in your wallet printed? Who originally mined all the inputs in your Bitcoin wallet? I mean, of course it is important to know where stuff comes from, we're talking about ~10 days and a few hundred transactions here though, not about how Ripple works since then.

Centralized platforms remind me of Liberty Reserve.

Me too, that's why I like Ripple, since it is not centralized.

[cbeast]

Me too, that's why I like Ripple, since it is not centralized.

Cool. Can I use Ripple without trusting any Gateways?

[Sukrim]

Me too, that's why I like Ripple, since it is not centralized.

Cool. Can I use Ripple without trusting any Gateways?

Sure.

[cbeast]

Me too, that's why I like Ripple, since it is not centralized.

Cool. Can I use Ripple without trusting any Gateways?

Sure.

Can I use it without going through Opencoin?

[Sukrim]

Me too, that's why I like Ripple, since it is not centralized.

Cool. Can I use Ripple without trusting any Gateways?

Sure.

Can I use it without going through Opencoin?

I guess you mean RippleLabs... yes, the client code is just hosted on ripple.com for convenience, you can run your own rippled to connect to and set up a webserver with the client locally too (it's what I do for example), I linked the repositories before. I'd recommend to use the tagged release versions and not bleeding edge code as it is under active development.

[grifferz]

It would be very unexpected to see that more than 100 billion XRP existed prior to #32570. With current transaction types etc. it is impossible in Ripple to issue more XRP, so the amount in #32570 is the maximum we know about

Is it at all possible that a transaction type existed before #32570 that could have allowed more XRP to be created, and then that transaction type was removed prior to ledger #32570 being published?

To be fair, you guys are asking me all the time about "theoretically possible", "at all possible" etc. - there are a lot of things "theoretically possible" in Bitcoin too. Yes, it is theoretically possible that this happened (though I cannot think of any reason why it should have and also have not found any evidence for that in any way).

To be fair I, as someone wanting to know more about Ripple, am just asking you simple direct questions in order to never have to go through the back and forth argument I have seen you and acoindr engage in several times on this subject, and your huffy attitude at being asked them just makes me less interested in spending my time in future.

[El Dude]

www.ripplescam.org

[Pente]

It seems to me that the market cap of Ripple totally exceeds it's volume:

http://coinmarketcap.com/

Capitalization = $ 815,887,553
Volume = $ 68,099
Ratio = 11980

I have brought this issue up and most people just tell me that I am just stupid or uneducated. Whatever.

But this brings up my #1 rule for investing. Never invest in something I don't understand. I need to understood both the concept & how it fits into the big picture. I feel I understand Ripple, I just can't see it becoming mainstream. And if it did, I can't see how it's value wouldn't be diluted.

Bitcoin has a ratio around 476
Litecoin is just under 100
Dogecoin is around 68

Blackcoin & Zetacoin are running around a 10 and even they have a bigger volume than Ripple. I would trust them long before I would trust Ripple.

My crypto investments are 95% Bitcoin & 5% Dogecoin. I trust Bitcoin because of the huge decentralized network behind it's elegant algorithm. I trust Dogecoin because of it's adoption of a fast confirm time, tiny costs of each unit, the huge community backing it, and the fact that it's inflation rate from mining will drop to about 5% each year at the end of 2014.

I don't trust Ripple.

[cbeast]

Me too, that's why I like Ripple, since it is not centralized.

Cool. Can I use Ripple without trusting any Gateways?

Sure.

Can I use it without going through Opencoin?

I guess you mean RippleLabs... yes, the client code is just hosted on ripple.com for convenience, you can run your own rippled to connect to and set up a webserver with the client locally too (it's what I do for example), I linked the repositories before. I'd recommend to use the tagged release versions and not bleeding edge code as it is under active development.

So if I set up a centralized  webserver as you suggest, the trades will be distributed with the Ripple Labs hosted transactions?

[acoindr]

To be fair, you guys are asking me all the time about "theoretically possible", "at all possible" etc. - there are a lot of things "theoretically possible" in Bitcoin too.

Like what? That there can be more than 21 million bitcoins without a protocol change?

There has been already a protocol change in Bitcoin to prevent that a few years ago (there was a bug that could issue more BTC than what was intended).

That's my point, that to change the 21 million cap on BTC requires a protocol change.

Next time please quote me completely, you missed this part:

(e.g. "there will be 21 million BTC" is provably wrong - there will be for sure less than that because some miners did non issue themselves all 50 BTC in coinbase in the past)

I said there will be LESS than 21 million BTC, not more.

I personally didn't miss that part. I thought it was obvious having LESS than a capped amount is more beneficial to all holders of the commodity in question. It's having MORE than a perceived capped amount that results in the problem (which is the problem I have with Ripple).

When were the dollar bills in your wallet printed?

Well, you've got me there. If you want to put Ripple on par with non-transparent Central Bank fiat currency I'll concede that.

Who originally mined all the inputs in your Bitcoin wallet?

It doesn't matter. Stop pretending it does. ALL of the records needed to check all of the bitcoins in existence are available now.

I mean, of course it is important to know where stuff comes from, we're talking about ~10 days and a few hundred transactions here though, not about how Ripple works since then.

Somehow I get the impression you already know this, but let me spell it out for anyone who doesn't: it only take one unaccounted for transaction to allow for trillions (or more) in unaccounted for currency units, because it's all only data.

[Sukrim]

It would be very unexpected to see that more than 100 billion XRP existed prior to #32570. With current transaction types etc. it is impossible in Ripple to issue more XRP, so the amount in #32570 is the maximum we know about

Is it at all possible that a transaction type existed before #32570 that could have allowed more XRP to be created, and then that transaction type was removed prior to ledger #32570 being published?

To be fair, you guys are asking me all the time about "theoretically possible", "at all possible" etc. - there are a lot of things "theoretically possible" in Bitcoin too. Yes, it is theoretically possible that this happened (though I cannot think of any reason why it should have and also have not found any evidence for that in any way).

To be fair I, as someone wanting to know more about Ripple, am just asking you simple direct questions in order to never have to go through the back and forth argument I have seen you and acoindr engage in several times on this subject, and your huffy attitude at being asked them just makes me less interested in spending my time in future.

Look, you are suggesting that instead of a software bug the first 10 days of Ripple transactions hide something that is not intended in the system, would shatter any kind of trust in RippleLabs as the developers and which would have 0 influence on Ripple whatsoever afterwards. It makes for nice theoretical discussions, the practical implications are however 0.

www.ripplescam.org

Proudly presented by: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=67058

It seems to me that the market cap of Ripple totally exceeds it's volume:

The volumes for XRP on coinmarketcap are underreported (they only represent BTC.Bitstamp/XRP afaik.) though compared to other coins they are still low. A good realistic ballpark figure is ~250k USD. I don't know how to fix them "properly" though or how to give a "real" volume, since trading volume is so easy to fake (see Huobi et.al.) and trading on Ripple is so cheap that it would be trivial to fake any kind of volume. I guess it's better to let people do their own research or assume there is not much going on rather than dealing with volume spikes of a few million BTC every now and then once someone decides to have some "fun".

I guess you mean RippleLabs... yes, the client code is just hosted on ripple.com for convenience, you can run your own rippled to connect to and set up a webserver with the client locally too (it's what I do for example), I linked the repositories before. I'd recommend to use the tagged release versions and not bleeding edge code as it is under active development.

So if I set up a centralized  webserver as you suggest, the trades will be distributed with the Ripple Labs hosted transactions?

rippled is not a webserver, you would probably deploy ripple-client on a local webserver though. Then tell the client to connect to your local server instead of the official public servers and your local rippled server needs connectivity to other rippled servers of course (just like bitcoind). I am not sure what you mean by "Ripple Labs hosted transactions".

I mean, of course it is important to know where stuff comes from, we're talking about ~10 days and a few hundred transactions here though, not about how Ripple works since then.

Somehow I get the impression you already know this, but let me spell it out for anyone who doesn't: it only take one unaccounted for transaction to allow for trillions (or more) in unaccounted for currency units, because it's all only data.

In Bitcoin yes (since it is based on previous outputs of transactions), in Ripple (which is based on balances) this is not true.

The thing about 21 millions was an example that some statements are often simplified ("there will only be 21 million Bitcoins" instead of "there will be at least 12.61 million Bitcoins and up to 20.999... million Bitcoins depending on miners acting economically rational or not") and as you see in this thread it is hard to find a balance.

[cbeast]

I guess you mean RippleLabs... yes, the client code is just hosted on ripple.com for convenience, you can run your own rippled to connect to and set up a webserver with the client locally too (it's what I do for example), I linked the repositories before. I'd recommend to use the tagged release versions and not bleeding edge code as it is under active development.

So if I set up a centralized  webserver as you suggest, the trades will be distributed with the Ripple Labs hosted transactions?

rippled is not a webserver, you would probably deploy ripple-client on a local webserver though. Then tell the client to connect to your local server instead of the official public servers and your local rippled server needs connectivity to other rippled servers of course (just like bitcoind). I am not sure what you mean by "Ripple Labs hosted transactions".

I meant Ripple Labs generated blockchain, although there isn't a way to validate that independently. As a black box, the Ripple Labs servers just seem to be a clearinghouse of transactions similar to Liberty Reserve.

[acoindr]

I mean, of course it is important to know where stuff comes from, we're talking about ~10 days and a few hundred transactions here though, not about how Ripple works since then.

Somehow I get the impression you already know this, but let me spell it out for anyone who doesn't: it only take one unaccounted for transaction to allow for trillions (or more) in unaccounted for currency units, because it's all only data.

In Bitcoin yes (since it is based on previous outputs of transactions), in Ripple (which is based on balances) this is not true.

The bottom line is it's not possible to verify the number of Ripple currency units in existence, in contrast to Bitcoin. You've already expressed as much:

It would be very unexpected to see that more than 100 billion XRP existed prior ....

I don't care if the system is based on balances, transactions, or lunar eclipse events. If ordinary people can't mathematically verify for themselves the number of units in existence they should be wary of investing anything into it.

[Sukrim]

I guess you mean RippleLabs... yes, the client code is just hosted on ripple.com for convenience, you can run your own rippled to connect to and set up a webserver with the client locally too (it's what I do for example), I linked the repositories before. I'd recommend to use the tagged release versions and not bleeding edge code as it is under active development.

So if I set up a centralized  webserver as you suggest, the trades will be distributed with the Ripple Labs hosted transactions?

rippled is not a webserver, you would probably deploy ripple-client on a local webserver though. Then tell the client to connect to your local server instead of the official public servers and your local rippled server needs connectivity to other rippled servers of course (just like bitcoind). I am not sure what you mean by "Ripple Labs hosted transactions".

I meant Ripple Labs generated blockchain, although there isn't a way to validate that independently. As a black box, the Ripple Labs servers just seem to be a clearinghouse of transactions similar to Liberty Reserve.

Well, just like with Bitcoin where you kinda need to use the Satoshi generated block chain, you kinda need to use the ledger chain RippleLabs started. You are free to run your own fork of course, but this has similar consequences as with Bitcoin (you'd create an Altcoin with Bitcoin rules or an alt-ledger with Ripple rules). Their validators are widely used, but not the only ones out there, so while they are currently still quite central to the network the network could very well survive without them. You can run your own validator by the way too, some people who are critical of RippleLabs would probably add yours to their UNL to have even more diversity. I might announce my own one "soonish" too, once it has a bit better hardware and runs more stable.

The bottom line is it's not possible to verify the number of Ripple currency units in existence, in contrast to Bitcoin. You've already expressed as much:

It would be very unexpected to see that more than 100 billion XRP existed prior ....

I don't care if the system is based on balances, transactions, or lunar eclipse events. If ordinary people can't mathematically verify for themselves the number of units in existence they should be wary of investing anything into it.

I already told you how to get the total number of XRP at any ledger since 32570, here you go again:

Code:

curl -X POST -d '{ "method" : "ledger", "params" : [ { "ledger_index" : 32570 } ] }' http://s1.ripple.com:51234

You can increment ledger_index and you'll see that these header form a hashed chain (see the value in parent_hash). If you want to see total balances of all accounts so you can make sure that they add up to the number in the header this is also possible.

I'm not sure how else to explain it, but if you deal with balances it does not matter what happened before a certain point of time, it matters what the state was at a certain point and what happened since then. Any ordinary(?) person with some knwoledge about accounting can tell you that and any ordinary(?) person that is a bit interested in programming and crypto can tell you that this is also verifiable on the ledger chain.

[CurbsideProphet]

I just came back from San Francisco, I think its time I take ripple seriously...

What exactly did you see that made you come to this conclusion?

[cbeast]

I guess you mean RippleLabs... yes, the client code is just hosted on ripple.com for convenience, you can run your own rippled to connect to and set up a webserver with the client locally too (it's what I do for example), I linked the repositories before. I'd recommend to use the tagged release versions and not bleeding edge code as it is under active development.

So if I set up a centralized  webserver as you suggest, the trades will be distributed with the Ripple Labs hosted transactions?

rippled is not a webserver, you would probably deploy ripple-client on a local webserver though. Then tell the client to connect to your local server instead of the official public servers and your local rippled server needs connectivity to other rippled servers of course (just like bitcoind). I am not sure what you mean by "Ripple Labs hosted transactions".

I meant Ripple Labs generated blockchain, although there isn't a way to validate that independently. As a black box, the Ripple Labs servers just seem to be a clearinghouse of transactions similar to Liberty Reserve.

Well, just like with Bitcoin where you kinda need to use the Satoshi generated block chain, you kinda need to use the ledger chain RippleLabs started. You are free to run your own fork of course, but this has similar consequences as with Bitcoin (you'd create an Altcoin with Bitcoin rules or an alt-ledger with Ripple rules). Their validators are widely used, but not the only ones out there, so while they are currently still quite central to the network the network could very well survive without them. You can run your own validator by the way too, some people who are critical of RippleLabs would probably add yours to their UNL to have even more diversity. I might announce my own one "soonish" too, once it has a bit better hardware and runs more stable.

The ledger chain as you call it is not mined. It is arbitrarily assembled by an algorithm subject to the whims and fancy of Coinlabs, Inc. and/or Ripple Labs. It is not an open source project and it is not even publicly auditable. Again, this centralized ledger is akin to Liberty Reserve which was shut down and the operators were arrested and indicted. It just sounds too risky to get involved with.

[acoindr]

I'm not sure how else to explain it, but if you deal with balances it does not matter what happened before a certain point of time ...

How in the world do you figure that?

Actually anything dealing with money involves transactions and balances. That's how any money system works.

You, Sukrim, have a dollar balance. You have a Ripple balance. You have a yen balance, and you have a bitcoin balance. You have balances for other things too which you may not have ever heard of. Now many of your balances may be zero (e.g. your yen balance etc.) but you have a balance, which is the sum of all the units of that currency you have in your possession. Whenever you make a tranasaction, i.e. trade with someone your balance changes.

Now you're trying to say dealing with Ripple balances means it doesn't matter what happened in the system before a point of time? Then how do you know anyone's balance?!? The whole point of any money system is accounting for peoples' balances. People want to increase their balance so they can buy more expensive things (make larger trades).

So within Ripple there must be a way to know all balances (this exists with Bitcoin). Otherwise the system does not allow anyone to mathematically check how many units the system has. As pointed out earlier, that's more akin to central bank fiat. So stop trying to confuse people by pretending there is some meaningful check which can be performed to verify how many ripple units exist in Ripple's system.