Well to be fair it seems this is more a criticism of banking in general, not Ripple. I'm not aware of Ripple claiming they'd reform banking practices. From my understanding they're simply designing a system that can allow banks to operate more efficiently.
How is not paying an interest on deposits and not having any central bank or self-reported regulation on reserves represent what banking ever was or is?
If banks will only use Ripple as a clearing mechanism between themselves then what great value does Ripple have?
Frankly I don't understand what the widespread use case is?
Banks have the problem of trusting solvency. I don't see how trusted gateways resolve anything. All Ripple does is record that a promise was made. It doesn't do anything to insure those promises are valid or even fungible. Banks can't trust the USD.banknamehere tokens of each of 100 other banks. That is why they use a central bank backed currency.
I don't see how Ripple improves on
the current situation at all.
Ripple reminds me of dot.com bubble with all the build it and they will come nonsense.
Ripple has
a coordination problem which even the Fed can't solve. This is why Bitcoin rules and Ripple is dogshit.
Well, that was my point earlier. I don't see banks becoming non-existent "soon". Are you talking 5, 10 or 20 years when you say that?
I expect that in 5 - 10 years from now the world financial and monetary system will be quite different.