Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing most liked content on 09/15/2016 in all areas

  1. 12 points

    A Big Update!

    @rippleric: I think we'll have to see in real life if RCL is more useful in atomic or universal mode transactions, but I think universal makes sense. To use Atomic Mode, everyone involved in the atomic-mode transaction has to agree on a set of ILP Notaries (also called ILP Validators, since they serve a kind of similar role to rippled validators) to approve and coordinate the transactions. The notaries can be picked differently for each transaction, if desired, so you don't have to continue to agree on the same notaries in the long term, but you do need to agree for the one transaction. In Universal Mode, payments can fail, but the system has incentives designed so that the connectors are the ones who take the loss, and generally only if one of the ledgers they're using fails. Connectors can price the risk of failure into their rates across ledgers, so everyone still ends up ahead in the long run. (At least, that's how it's supposed to work. Doubtless someone will make a mistake somewhere and end up losing lots of money at some point. That's pretty much inevitable with any new financial system. We're pretty confident there are no exploits in the protocol itself.) There's also Optimistic Mode, which just assumes that payments will succeed. It's, uh, actually useful in some special cases? Since the RCL is already decentralized, redundant, and has long-term validators, it provides very reliable operation. In Universal Mode, that's a valuable quality for a ledger to have (and fast settlement time is another nice bonus). So I think RCL will be a pretty good intermediary in Universal-mode transactions, especially in ones connecting to obscure corridors or sources of value. It might be worth breaking down this diagram a little more: You all have heard of Ripple Connect before, but this is the new version of Ripple Connect that uses the Interledger Protocol (in Atomic Mode) directly. The "ILP Ledger" in this case is an ILP-enabled sub-ledger we package with the Ripple Solution. Each bank runs their own ILP (sub-)Ledger to hold funds that can be transferred to other banks atomically through the Interledger Protocol. Ripple Connect handles the messaging and coordinates the transfers from the bank's core ledger to the ILP-enabled sub-ledger. Then the ILP payment from one bank's sub-ledger to the other bank's sub-ledger happens automatically (and atomically!), using one or more ILP-enabled liquidity providers (aka Connectors) and the other bank's Ripple Connect takes it from there to go from the ILP sub-ledger to the beneficiary bank's core ledger. The ILP Validator (also known as an ILP Notary) can be a single Notary run by either bank or a third party, or it can be an ad-hoc consensus group of Notaries. (So far, we're only using one validator per transaction.) For the first version of this whole system, we're having the Liquidity Provider also be run by one of the banks, which is what big banks usually do anyway. Eventually the liquidity provider could be chosen from an approved set of liquidity providers based on the best rate available. I think it should be a pretty painless upgrade to using a network of them, or to switch one liquidity provider for another. At no point in this process do the banks need to use the RCL, but it's entirely possible that the liquidity provider can use XRP behind the scenes to reduce exchange rates. I can't promise when we'll have more to say about that, but I'm pretty sure we'll have more to say at some point.
  2. 10 points
  3. 9 points
    https://www.fastcompany.com/3063746/it-might-take-longer-than-you-think-for-the-future-of-banking-to-arrive Six of one, half dozen of the other. Lots of exuberance today, so don't forget:
  4. 7 points
    This is my favorite proposal
  5. 5 points
  6. 5 points
    the counter at the ripple.com homepage has incremented from 12 to 15 of the top 50 banks work with ripple.
  7. 5 points
  8. 5 points

    A Big Update!

    ILP is a protocol for transactions across ledgers. It's built on two very simple primitives, escrow and release. The magic happens when the release condition for one ledger is a payment on another. ILP requires at least two ledgers to accomplish anything useful. These ledgers can be RCL, Bitcoin, any existing proprietary ledger that supports ILP, or custom-built ILP "side" ledgers built just to facilitate ILP transactions. Ripple connect is a piece of proprietary software that allows banks to make payments using ILP and/or RCL. It handles both the transaction and the necessary setup and coordination to meet FI requirements for things like auditability and compliance. ILP's universal mode does not require any notaries or validators, but it does have some settlement risk. This can be priced into low-value transactions. But for high-value transactions, you really want atomic mode which requires notaries to reduce points of failure. You can think of notaries as analogous to RCL validators except that they only agree on a single transaction and can operate in private. I explained it in a bit more detail here: https://forum.ripple.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=15723 Any ILP transaction will have no significant technical obstacles to being bridged by XRP. The only obstacles will be regulatory/compliance and cost. The challenge for Ripple will be to promote ILP, get XRP spreads down, and then help FIs handle the regulatory/compliance issues.
  9. 3 points
    I know all the arguments guys - i'm not holding millions of XRP for no reason. But it's dangerous to rely on the correlation between Ripple and XRP to much imo, we should not talk down the risks.
  10. 3 points
    https://ripple.com/insights/several-global-banks-join-ripples-growing-network/ Too hard to pick out the best snippets. You'll have to read it all. I do like this teaser though:
  11. 3 points
    I nominate you to take up the "10 cents by Monday" torch, now that @heartbit_io isn't hanging around anymore.
  12. 3 points
    I thought about building something along these lines, but there is not even an easily available import/export format for ledgers other than the "ledger" call JSON (without inner nodes), so such a thing would require to kinda build your own ledger/block explorer on top of whatever technology stack ("blockchain enabled" or not, e.g. BigQuery). My estimate is that the paying customers for something like this are in the low double digits at best... A better start would be to have a database dump that can be imported every 1 million ledgers or so that is built deterministically and can be shared via BitTorrent or other file sharing platforms so others can just run rippled and build their services on top of that. There I ran into the problem that NuDB is not widely usedor easily accessible outside of C++ (and I don't know how deterministic it is in the first place) and RocksDB also seems a bit flakey to me. Offering a more verbose (but compressed) e.g. text based dump and supplying a import skript seems like a reasonable middle ground, however it still has a few issues (like getting the data out of the nodestore in a timely fashion - querying a full ledger is not exactly a matter of milliseconds...).
  13. 2 points
  14. 2 points
    Awesome news! Congrats to all Ripple employees, it must be super exiting to work in such a dynamic company. For us, the same doubts about XRP remain, however. I think nobody was ever worried about Ripple the company during the last years. They had money, they were growing and had a massive amount of partnerships and POC's with all kinds of heavyweight FI's. But the question is if XRP will be a integral part of that successful machine. For me this news is not really changing the way i look at XRP - it's still a very risky thing to put money in. I was hoping that the next big announcement would include some form of commitment from partners to build up XRP liquidity.
  15. 2 points
    ....this seems also quite interesting (from the Coindesk article): "This gives us a strong balance sheet to also consider acquisitions. There are a lot of small players doing something interesting. Historically, we wouldn’t be interested, but going forward we may be."
  16. 2 points
  17. 2 points
    The fine against Ripple for it's early practices is a case in point. It unfairly targeted one of the only blockchain-based businesses brave enough to have an office in the U.S. (Thanks for scaring off new fintech business to other countries that understand the "sandbox" concetp!)
  18. 2 points
    Checking out https://stellarchain.io/
  19. 2 points
    Goldman Sachs, got three letters for you: I,L,P.
  20. 2 points
    I'm starting to think that transactions being public on RCL is actually a killer feature. But only after business are starting to feel comfortable to trade in full daylight, and this becomes a new standard. The most honest salesman has nothing to hide. He tells you: this is what it costs me, and this is what I charge others, this is what I earn, and this is how much taxes i pay. Taxes of which, in this future world, we can see exactly how that is being spent by the government! Who would you rather do business with, a business that provides little transparency, or one that provides full transparency? Where would you expect to pay the lowest price for the best product? And perhaps even more important: where would you rather invest in? If the answer to these questions is "the transparent one", that will mean the market moves to there. The big idea behind the DAO was its transparent government and funding of business projects. You can say that idea rang a bell with many people.
  21. 2 points
    No, you need to use ILP or something else for that. RCL itself has no single KYC scheme -- it's an automated, distributed system with no central authority to impose such rules on the system. To use it, each participant just needs to comply with whatever laws apply to them. It has features (such as authorized accounts and freeze) that may facilitate compliance for some users, but you don't have to use them unless your particular compliance (or technical) requirements demand them, in which case you probably couldn't use a system without them.
  22. 1 point

    A Big Update!

    With the Ripple Solution we're selling, it chooses a trusted notary automatically according to some simple rules. The protocol itself is indifferent to how you make your decision as long as you choose.
  23. 1 point
    ...and why is this in Yahoo! Sports? http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ripple-raises-55-million-series-130000609.html
  24. 1 point
    Anyone have any comments about this: "With a growth trajectory that will soon force the settlement startup out of its San Francisco headquarters..." "Within the next six months, Garlinghouse said Ripple will outgrow its San Francisco offices and sign a deal at a new location twice the size...." Where ya' all goin'? ...
  25. 1 point

    A Big Update!

    it's literally my job
  26. 1 point
    A friend mine also recorded a conversation explaining the tech to someone who is new to the space. Again, very high level and non technical but I figure the more it helps people understand where this is all going, the better. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4jV03rHY6I
  27. 1 point
    So this is the news that finally broke the 'good news - price dive' trend, hah. Now the only way is upwords, I hope?
  28. 1 point
  29. 1 point

    How long will the money last

    OK there are another 55m$ - I think we are safe now.
  30. 1 point
  31. 1 point
    @lerik, you lost me at "Bitcoin ... very innovative and fast developing."
  32. 1 point
    Will be interesting to see how this turns out. It's pretty tough to get a patent for "software" especially for code that's been in the public domain for some time.
  33. 1 point
    Hey Oracle, somebody is trying to patent your distributed database!
  34. 1 point
    Also you'll have a hard time getting historic data from connected nodes, only very few keep full history. It might be worth a shot to contact Ripple directly and ask for a database dump from them that you can import instead of relying on syncing over the internet.
  35. 1 point

    A Big Update!

    Kinda neat. You have so many ways in and out of networks as the IoV emerges. Banks can use ILP, or RCL, or both, depending on what they need in terms of speed/privacy/risk etc. Then you have Ripple's software plugging seamlessly into pretty much anything (i.e. it's future proofed) via ILP anyway, but with its own validation topology to keep close networks of trust and partnerships, etc. You have RCL basically focusing on being the open marketplace to buy and sell XRP, which banks could also tap once they find XRP useful. Then there's the whole public decentralised exchange aspect open to "everyone" to trade/pay/experiment using the RCL order books, going through XRP if desired, with the autobridging and everything that it features. The whole thing is coming together; it's about getting the right pieces in place at the right time. Now it makes sense the way Ripple have focused on getting this banking software out first. The rest should fall into place afterwards. The visual aids in these docs are really helping me. I am curious about whether RCL (if not now but in a future form) will sort of merge into ILP more, so that trust lines etc can be used as part of the validator topology?
  36. 1 point

    A Big Update!

    Not sure where you're getting that from? The Ripple network is a way of saying all of Ripple's interacting parts isn't it? Connect, Stream, RCL, validators, databases, etc. Seems to me if anything they just simplified the graphics in those PDF examples. Since banks don't really need to know all the ins and outs of a public consensus ledger and decentralised exchange and bla bla; they just want to know there's optional liquidity if they need it, but mostly they'll be going through their own networks. Maybe I'm totally wrong on that.
  37. 1 point

    Private account / transaction on RCL

    This is a new document re transaction privacy: https://ripple.com/insights/going-beyond-blockchain-pt-2-ensuring-transaction-privacy/
  38. 1 point
    I thought @JoelKatz was implying that RCL doesn't directly support anonymity, but ILP can communicate a private transaction with the RCL from some other ledger. Maybe I'm wrong. I thought the whole point of ILP was the ability to connect up all different ledgers together - using a standard protocol. So, I could use a <anonymous>coin transaction, and then communicate the transaction to another ledger via ILP.
  39. 1 point
    Sorry, kinda found that long and boring – thanks for sharing though.
  40. 1 point
    The two are linked but not wholly dependent on each other. XRP holdings obviously has a bearing on Ripple's total value, but its divestment and business strategies put more value on other offerings than its crypto holdings. XRP value obviously is linked to the ongoing efforts of RIpple and its product releases, but it is not totally dependent on Ripple. If either should fail the other could continue on, although both are stronger for the other.
  41. 1 point
    A follow-up question to this: Should Ripple (Corporate) or Ripple (XRP) have a higher total market cap value? And why? Which has the higher risk, and which the higher upper bound?