Ninjastic
Search content
Sort by
Showing 2 of 2 results by tjsherlock
Post
Topic
Board Service Discussion
Re: Why Ripple™ is against everything Bitcoin
by
tjsherlock
on 07/03/2014, 18:50:28 UTC
I would rather you qualify the alt currency as OC Ripple.  Ripple was conceived and developed before OpenCoin commercialized and forked it.
You may not agree with the original version of Ripple (Ripple Original) either, but it is different from the OC Ripple you describe.


Quote from: TradeFortress on May 11, 2013, 04:57:38 AM
Ripple™ is a trademark of OpenCoin Inc, a private for-profit company. I am breaking their Terms of Service by using the trademark Ripple without permission. Sue me.

Satoshi Nakamoto:
Quote
The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust thats required to make it
work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of
fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our
money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles
with barely a fraction in reserve. We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them
not to let identity thieves drain our accounts. Their massive overhead costs make
micropayments impossible.

With Bitcoin, you hold your own money. You control it.

With Ripple, you don't hold money. You hold debt, IOUs. You hold debt issued by a "gateway", a central authority.

As it is debt, they can print as much as they want, when they want. (Aka debasing).

>> See here, I printed myself 1 trillion bitcoins on ripple.

With Bitcoin, miners are required to use their computational power to earn new Bitcoins and transaction fees.

With Ripple, OpenCoin Inc issued themselves 100 billion ripples. They promised to only keep half (50%) for themselves.


With Bitcoin, nobody can spend your money without your private keys.

With Ripple, as the server source code has not being released and it is still proprietary, OpenCoin Inc can change the rules and spend your money.


Bitcoin is v2.0 of money - where you control it in a democratic process via mining. Core network rules are embedded in open source code.

Ripple is v1.1 of money - building on top of existing central banks, and fiat money. Their current marketing efforts are set to overtake and destroy BTC, with their centralized system.


With Bitcoin, 1 BTC is 1 BTC. They're accepted in every BTC accepting site.

With USD, 1 USD is 1 USD. They're accepted in every USD accepting site.

With Ripple, 1 BTC-Bitstamp is 1 BTC-Bitstamp. You lose them when Bitstamp [gets hacked | by owners | raided by DHS]. And it is a question of when - no site lasts forever.


Learn more: http://ripplescam.org/
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Google funding Ripple
by
tjsherlock
on 07/03/2014, 18:40:26 UTC
Quote from: Zangelbert Bingledack on May 15, 2013, 02:00:24 PM
Erik Voorhees made an excellent post on OC Ripple here. That and his followups are very interesting. I basically agree entirely with his position. Not a scam, not too greedy, but too greedy to succeed long-term. Just a glorified pre-mined altcoin.

I have been following Ripple at a distance for the last several years since it was created by Ryan Fugger.  So first I want to thank you Zangelbert for qualifying the altcoin here as OC Ripple, because that's what it is.  It is definitely a fork of Ripple original.  Ripple was conceived and developed before 2009.  It just never got any commercial traction until OpenCoin came along.

I don't really see Ripple as being a competitor to Bitcoin, but rather as a complementary currency.  But I'm really talking about Ripple (or Ripple Original) not OC Ripple.  I'm not sure what to make of OC Ripple. it seems to be a hybrid with two masters.  Ripple Original is not really a currency but rather a payment system or means of exchange without being a store of value and without being a means of price discovery.  XRP on the other hand was introduced to simply be a unit of account without being a store of value and without being a means of exchange.
If XRP is still representing only a unit of account in OC Ripple, then it makeS sense that it would be destroyed at some point.  The XRP should get created when a currency enters the system and should be destroyed when the currency leaves the system.  It does not depend on a blockchain.  Not sure about the general ledger, however; I've forgotten.

Someone here mentioned that OC Ripple represented debt.  Essentially that it is true.  The most fundamental definition of currency is debt.  When you give me a valuable or provide me with a service I am in your debt.  If I do not have a valuable or service that you want I give a promissory note or an IOU.  In the US that IOU comes in the form of FRN, in Europe as Euros, in Japan as Yen, in Ithaca, NY as Ithaca HOURS, etc.  You accept this IOU because you know you can pass it on to someone else who provides you with a valuable or service.

One of the driving forces behind Ripple Original is Trust.  A payment travels through the Ripple system over a route of least resistance as determined by Trust.  Ripple was meant be to decentralized (similar to the direction that Chris Odom wants to take Open-Transactions minus the trust).  Each node doubles as a server with the ability to create currency as well as act a as a pass-through for payments from trusted nodes.  Each node has the option of charging a toll before allowing a payment to flow through from Bob to Sally. OC Ripple convolutes all of this while still ideally intending to create a decentralized system based on Trust.

It's nice to know that Erik Voorhees is quite the evangelist for Bitcoin ( I see a lot value in the cryptocurrency and hold some myself), I'm disappointed however that he is so down on Ripple, but not surprised as it is really OC Ripple.