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.