Quote from: vleroybrown on March 03, 2014, 03:08:41 AM

... This makes ripple a clear contender on a level that is insurmountable to the current state of the bitcoin environment.

I really like the idea of Ripple, but the current problem I have with it is there seems to be no way to verify how many ripples exist. If people complain about Satoshi possibly having 1M or about 5% of all bitcoins, when there is a known amount, what can they say about the creators of Ripple?

Also, keep in mind things change. I believe everyone involved in Bitcoin does better as time goes by, if for no other reason than price appreciation. Another example is that Gavin is formally paid to work on Bitcoin now, via the Bitcoin Foundation, as opposed to early on when it didn't exist.

Quote from: BittBurger on March 03, 2014, 03:17:37 AM

Thanks guys.

Is there any risk to progress when you have a decentralized development team, and nobody technically managing the project?
Nobody handling the list of bugs and enhancements, making sure they get done in a timely manner, and nobody to load test or fully QA the system?
PS: A developer acting as project manager usually isn't the best idea in my experience as a project manager.

Yes, I think there is somewhat. That might have been on display with the unintentional version 8 software bug/fork. At the same time I think management of the project is somewhat crowdsourced. For example, I don't contribute core code but I think about the overall system and potential issues with possible solutions all the time. The block size/scalability issue is the biggest example of that. I've weighed in often on the subject and actually have my own ideas for solution which are separate, but complementary to the official answer at the wiki.