Quote from: JoelKatz on April 11, 2013, 01:14:38 PM

I don't think we are. We've been quite clear about what's open now and what are future plans are.

Please quote you being clear on ripple's website.

Quote from: JoelKatz on April 11, 2013, 01:14:38 PM

There's no conflict. For example, Bitcoin doesn't require you to trust any central authority, but most people either use online wallets (where they trust the wallet operator) or download client software (where they trust the software provider). The important thing is that Bitcoin doesn't *require* them to trust people in this way. They just do so because it's convenient -- making a considered judgment to balance risk and convenience.

Bitcoin is open-source and anyone can audit algorithms and the code. Trusted nodes list can't be audited in the same way as it's more opinion-based.

Quote from: JoelKatz on April 11, 2013, 01:14:38 PM

All XRP were created when the genesis ledger was created. No further XRP can ever be created. Other currencies are created when a pathway is created with a non-zero limit and then funds are pushed along that patway.

And who's the owner of XRP in genesis ledger?

Quote from: JoelKatz on April 11, 2013, 01:14:38 PM

We've simulated precisely that condition. How fast it converges under those conditions depends upon the latency between the nodes. Under most realistic conditions, it can converge within 4 seconds, even with 1,000 nodes.

Did you miss "malicious nodes" part? And "hard proof" part? Simulation can be good if all nodes are honest, but fail in case of specific attack.

Quote from: JoelKatz on April 11, 2013, 01:14:38 PM

not unlike the hard fork Bitcoin had recently

This is quite different thing. bitcoin nodes did not agree on what's legitimate block. I'm talking about severing network connectivity for a while.