Jump to content

About This Club

Hi, I'm Bob! I'd like to write a book. The topic is, "Ripple, XRP, Cryptocurrency, Blockchain and the Future of Money." Notice how I got all the good buzzwords in the title? That's so it's good for search engine optimization! Unfortunately, that's all I have. Worse, I'm not a writer by trade so the process is painful for me. So I need your help. The only way to write a compelling book is to focus on important concepts that people don't already understand. In contrast to re-hashing concepts people (like you) who are already compelled to study the space already know. But of course, I don't know the difference. So you are here to help me. (See what I did there? You thought I was here to help you!) I'm here to get all the compelling bits written down coherently... well, compelling in my mind. Of course the explanations will suck at first. At least from professional writing standards. So I'll re-write them over and over again until y'all say. Enough! We get it already! My 5 year old gets it! Enough already! Then I'll know that my job is done.  It may or may not end up as a paper book. Maybe an eBook, a blog, or a video series. We'll see how it goes. And if you help, you'll get to see it first!

  1. What's new in this club
  2. I didn't had a lot of time when you launched this initiative. However I should be able to join your study group now if that would be ok with you.
  3. Family and health always comes first. Great to read the good news and I'm happy you're back!
  4. I’m going to abuse my mod privilege here to post in your thread and speak for all of us how delighted we are that you are ok. Welcome back Bob but please don’t overdo it... steady as she goes mate.
  5. I’m back to working on this project again. I’ll post background material as I run across it.
  6. @SquaryBone Thank's for inquiring. I just posted some updates here. I'm still a bit overwhelmed and am slowly catching up. If anyone had urgent issues please PM or post them and tag me so I get a beep.
  7. Wow it has been longer than I expected. Thank you everyone for sending all your good wishes. I've had a bunch of family related issues to handle over the past few months. Some were related to family members. Just the kind of things that every family has from time to time. But these issues outrank everything else for me. I don't mind talking about my issues, but the ones related to others I'm going to keep to myself. For those wondering, the doctors assure me that my prostate cancer is likely handled. They assure me this is true even though my PSA numbers are still higher than they should be. It turns out this past week I had my first PSA number drop! Woot! The working diagnosis is that I've had a strange case of prostatitis. I've had two months of different antibiotics and the second one seemed to turn the tide. I'll have lots more followup to make sure. But at least the discomfort is diminishing. One of the other long time consuming issues was that Janet and I have been basically transient for more than five years. This has included more city and apartment moves than I care to count. Unfortunately, our unpredictability has had negative impact on the rest of our extended family. So it became apparent that we needed to pick a permanent home base to settle into. Of course as anyone my age knows, these decisions become complicated when you have both aging parents to plan for and children you'd like to be close to. The end result is that we managed to move two more times. Finally we are almost settled into the place we intend to stay for a while. It's not super impressive, just a two bedroom condo, but we like it. My mother will be moving close to us in the near future. The combination will make a nice "home base" for the kids to come visit. Of course, when you close everything seems move-in-ready. But the move-in reality soon becomes an endless stream of home improvement projects to undertake. I'm still trying to sort out a 3-way light switch that looks like it was wired by a crazy person. There's no cabinet, closet space or furniture to unpack all our boxes into And here is a deck that needs to be rebuilt. The good news is that I have the internet working. Better still, my desk and computer are setup and I finally have a quiet office to work in! Woot! The plan is to get back to work on the Study Group if there is still interest. I'm digging out the decks and reworking the examples for practice today. In addition, I'll be reading the latest posts here in the book club and responding where I can be helpful. Feel free to message me if you have anything urgent to discuss. It's good to be back!
  8. We didn't hear from you the last few days. I hope you're doing well and got good news and are celebrating and/or spending time with your family. The silence doesn't make me, and probably others as well, reassured that it was good news though. Silly how I don't really know you but I still feel anxious that you're ok and will fully recover. I think it proves the positive impact you've had on this community.
  9. Thanks for understanding. I do find as I wade back in that I have a lot of catching up to do again. Both on the actual news and the community's perceptions of the actual news. Of course on top of that there are huge amounts of rumors, speculation and riddles. I'm absolutely sure I don't have enough time to catch up on those.
  10. You don't have to apologize Bob, health comes first. I'm glad your back. A lot has has happened in the short time you've been away , a great amount of developments and progress, unfortunately not yet reflected in the price of course lol. I have absolute faith that is coming. The "general discussion " has become a sh*t storm of Debbie Downers and negative overtones so be wary of that. There's is only a few and once this cycle ramps up and the price reflects this movement I'm sure they will be "silenced ". You won't have to worry about that here though , especially with @Tinyaccount looking after this book club, I'm sure his boot will get a work out kicking them out of here, a task I'm sure he will relish. Glad you're back.
  11. Thank you dr_ed and everyone else for sending your good wishes. I'm about to go have another PSA test today. Hopefully this will be the one that finally goes down. I should know by Thursday when I have an appointment with my doctor. But I am feeling better and have settled most of the issues and projects that have kept me away. So I'm looking forward to reconnecting with everyone here again. I'll also be working with Polly to get the study group back on track. Sorry to everyone for the delay.
  12. We'll definitely do something. Let me get my focus back first though.
  13. Lol - Exactly what I was thinking when he was describing it to me. Those are issuances! XRP did that from the start! Those are payment channels, XRP has been using those (and they work) for years now. Wow such innovation from the BTC devs!
  14. I find myself without the concentration to watch videos. Which is strange because I seem to have to concentration to read and type an enormous amount of text. :-) But when faced with discussions like ERC-20 tokens, lightning payment channels and other "novel" ideas, it all seems so 5 years ago to me. I'll try to watch this tomorrow. I need to get a little sleep now. I hope I was helpful.
  15. This is largely only true for corporates correct? It seems like the "workaround" DS was describing is the use of xVia to bridge xCurrent and xRapid so MG can quote Fiat to Fiat while completing via xRapid. See my other post on xNaming clarification. SWIFT runs a financial messaging system that is true. But xVia isn't the messaging system for RippleNet. Instead, each xProduct has an integrated messaging component that assures each financial party agrees to the terms of a transaction before any money moves. xVia is simply a hosted solution (and API) for business to use in originating payments that move through RippleNet (xCurrent+xRapid). Every Ripple xProduct allows the sender to specify fiat to (other) fiat payments. Those might be routed fiat/fiat or fiat/xrp/fiat depending on cost. So technically, RippleNet is integrated Messaging + Settlement. SWIFT is Messaging to be used in conjunction with traditional correspondent banking based settlement.
  16. I asked this question of Alex from Nugget's news and he talked about BTC wrapped in an ETH ERC-20 token. He also talked about another side chain that exchanges will use to allow customers to move BTC between exchanges in something very similar to a payment channel. Of course this will just help whales arbitrage and not allow the privacy claimed, because there is no exit ramp without going through an exchange's KYC/AML choke point.
  17. That is really old information. It was true that the recommended UNL contained only 5 ripple operated validators for quite some time. But that changed one more people became able to reliably operate their own rippled validators. Currently the recommended starting UNL seems to be downloadable from here https://vl.ripple.com. I'm presuming that it is a signed blob so that it can be verifiably hosted elsewhere as well. This page documents who owns and operates those validators (UNL column). https://xrpcharts.ripple.com/#/validators
  18. Not at all like lightening network, Banks provide their own liquidity, still uses Nostro/Vostro, and xCurrent is simply tracking/directing/updating private ledgers of the movement/release of funds between the two or more institutions involved. After reading a bit more, seems they're bringing issued currencies and gateways on the XRPL into the mix, and that's mostly what they're referring to here. Ripple from its origination in classic RipplePay has had "trust lines" (accounts) in multiple currencies. It has often used the term IOU in reference to these accounting relationships. Bitcoin traditionally has not considered anything like this as part of its blockchain. However, with lightning, people have been discussing payment channels as if they were IOUs or trust lines that are settled later. So now I often hear bitcoiners rippling concepts as "like lightning". Of course it is generally futile to point out that these concepts predate lightning by 15 years or more.
  19. Okay, I found it, the public keys became "private keys" because that sounds more mysterious: https://blog.bitmex.com/the-ripple-story/ With BitMEX being a partner, hopefully someone at Ripple can reach out to get this corrected.
  20. I can't for the life of me think of what they have misunderstood here. I'm sure the default UNL API call is referenced through an HTTPS based URL to avoid tampering. But I don't know of any other downloaded keys or certs. I don't know of Ripple signing other's certs either.
  21. Yes exactly! In practice it works really well. However, it must be configured within the spirit of what you've written. It is pretty easy to show that if you have zero overlap, or minimal overlap in network participants then their ledgers will diverge.
  22. Think of it the other way around. Anyone can make a UNL list. They don't have to ask permission from the validators to do so. So if you don't like Ripple's list, you just publish your own with the edits you want. It is then up to you to convince everyone else that your UNL starting list is better than Ripple's UNL starting list. If there is significant overlap between the two than they can easily coexist without consequences. If on the the other hand you propose a dramatically different UNL (worst case zero overlap), then you are simply proposing that a new transactional fork is being created. Yes, as you point out, like with BTC based new coin airdrops, anyone could create a new transactional fork of the XRP Ledger. It just becomes up to you to make everyone else care.
  23. Okay, so the validators in a sense are organized like resistance cells. They don't all know each other, but each cell (UNL) works together, some may overlap and have connections/contacts to members of other resistance cells (UNLs). By broadcasting to all validators known to you, and the process repeating, eventually everyone is informed?
  24. Think of the Ripple suggested default UNL as two independent things. 1. It is a Validators ID == Public Key to node operator name map. This is what makes any particular validating node "known" and assures that any given UNL has only one "unique" entry for that node operator. Technically, Ripple as a validator operator has not necessarily had a single "unique" entry on the default UNL. But that has been an operational compromise the company is working to remove. 2. It is an attestation by Ripple that the particular validators on the list are reliably operated. Meaning they have consistent uptime staying insync with the others on the list. Nothing about inclusion on the UNL attests to the character of the rippled nodes operator or their business honesty. Nor does it consider whether or not those operators have any particular value stake (e.g. XRP holdings) in the network itself. it simply says, here are who these people are. Include them or remove them at your own discretion. If you start with a UNL of 100 and remove 95. Well that is likely bad. If you remove 2 or 3 you won't notice any effect at all. Now very interestingly (and like bitcoin) you don't submit transactions to validating nodes at all. Transactions are simply broadcast to every other rippled node. Those broadcasts include validating nodes as well of course. But in general, if you run your own rippled node (validating or not) you would sign and submit your transactions to your own node. It would then in turn broadcast them to the other nodes it is connected to (via IP addresses). Those nodes broadcast it further. During this process your transaction will make it to every rippled validator. However, by design to avoid DOS attacks, there is no proscribed validator --> IP address map.
  25. This is where I'm confused about the whole consensus mechanism overall. I understand you can have different pools (UNLs), but how do they all stay in sync? If one validator or group gets out of sync or behind, does it just grab a current ledger close and pick back up? How does this sort itself out? I think I addressed this in my previous post. Their astonishment is based purely on bad presumptions. If I specify 5 validators I will stay in agreement with them. If you specify 5 validators, you will stay in agreement with those. There is no underlying presumption that I want to stay in sync with the people you want to stay in sync with. (Think test net vs main net vs other net) Nor is there a presumption that I want to accept consensus proposals from individuals anonymous to me, even if they may be known to you. So suppose that your node (validator or not) crashes and falls out of sync with the others. When you bring it back up, it will simply begin doing what it always does. It looks for consensus proposals from the other nodes on its UNL. Once it sees a proposal that matches its consensus rules (80% of the UNL proposes the same thing) it accepts that as the next ledger. It then starts to look backward to see if it is missing any prior ledgers from its local database. If so, it begins downloading them to close any gaps in the record.

  • Create New...