Quote from: grifferz on April 05, 2014, 06:15:09 PM

Quote from: Sukrim on April 05, 2014, 04:57:55 PM

Quote from: grifferz on April 05, 2014, 04:46:18 PM

Quote from: Sukrim on April 05, 2014, 04:25:20 PM

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.

Quote from: El Dude on April 05, 2014, 06:17:44 PM

www.ripplescam.org

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

Quote from: Pente on April 05, 2014, 06:20:37 PM

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".

Quote from: cbeast on April 05, 2014, 06:21:05 PM

Quote from: Sukrim on April 05, 2014, 06:07:55 PM

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".

Quote from: acoindr on April 05, 2014, 06:22:13 PM

Quote from: Sukrim on April 05, 2014, 05:57:19 PM

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.