Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/17/2019 in all areas

  1. 17 points
    This analysis examines four of the major criticisms of XRP: 1) US government regulatory threat 2) Lack of market adoption by financial institutions for cross-border remittance 3) Competition from Swift, the incumbent 4) Technological risk associated with the Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm (RPCA) Using an empirical approach based on observations of key stakeholders on each issue, this analysis attempts to to qualify the threat of these criticisms to XRP adoption using two matrices. The first will contrast Current Unknowns – how much about this risk is unknown, vs. Threat Development Time – how long market participants will have time to make decisions based on new information. The second matrix explores the Probability that the threat will occur versus the Impact on XRP in terms of the severity if the threat materializes. https://coinsavage.com/content/2019/01/risk-analysis-of-xrp-the-four-horsemen/
  2. 8 points
    Looks Like we have more Progress... Not a bad Place to live too IMO. https://news.livecoinwatch.com/wyoming-crypto-envelope-blockchain-bills/
  3. 8 points
    Thanks @hallwaymonitor and Galgitron This is both fascinating and horrifying at the same time... "Some would say it would take billions of dollars to purchase all the equipment necessary to successfully out-arrow the good guys, but it is possible to now 'rent' arrow-cannons (hashing power) by the hour, and as Bitcoin's good hashing rate drops because the payouts are so low, eventually it will be reasonable to expect someone will rent enough hashpower to be the majority hashing power on Bitcoin, and then they can pull the Satoshi shadow chain trick, spending all kinds of Bitcoins, then taking them all back by rolling the shadow chain over the main chain, and then quickly converting those returned Bitcoins into cash before the world figures out what happened." "Considering the millions of dollars one could easily steal, the minimal cost of renting this amount of hashpower seems a pittance, nay, an investment. It will happen. It may already be happening. The fact that so much more hashing hardware has been produced lately that ISN'T showing up in Bitcoin or largely anywhere else, might make you realize that a lot of hashpower has gone dark, and that should worry anyone that is invested in PoW tech." ..."It's not theoretical, it's reality, and today, right this minute, we're entirely trusting 3 profit-motivated Chinese CEOs to not f**k with our money. Put another way, would you fly to China and give all your money to 3 Chinese pool operators for safe-keeping? If you're in Bitcoin, that's what you're doing." ...And I like your answer! - "The best thing to do is to accept that these crushing waves of 51% attacks will continue to come and hit bigger coins, so get OUT of PoW coins, and get into the serene safety of XRP." Does this double-spend problem affect XRP as well? "No, XRP does not suffer from ANY of the PoW or PoS vulnerabilities because there's simply no mining involved. The strategy for securing the blockchain data and account balances is radically different, provably much more secure, PROFOUNDLY more decentralized..." "What XRP does differently is it relies upon a consortium of validators to come to at least 80% consensus on what the current state of the accounts and transactions are, every 3-4 seconds. Once they agree, balances are updated, the block is sealed, signed, connected to the prior block ,and forever locked in history. There is NO ATTACK that can change the past in XRP, no shadow chains, no 51% attacks, no amount of hardware you can rent to attack it; you can't even spam it without costing yourself a fortune. XRP is a ******* digital fortress; your balances and transactions are permanent. Sleep well." (Bold emphasis is mine)
  4. 8 points
    Over the years I've been really impressed that Proof of Work actually worked and continued working. I mean, I hate how incredibly wasteful it is, but I had to respect the fact that it was a real thing. But 2018 was a real wake-up call to the fact that 51% attacks were not just for obscure joke coins. Galgitron makes a convincing case that proof of work as a whole is doomed. That's both interesting and scary.
  5. 7 points
    This is a talk from November's IMF event. Ryan Zagone is the Director of Regulatory Relations in Ripple and he literary NAILED it!
  6. 7 points
    Ripple holding the majority of XRP in escrow is smart business for the use case they are trying to achieve. If you are trying to build currency exchange software you need to make sure that the lion share of use is by large banks. I don't give a rip what any Bitcoin or Ethereum maximalist says or believes. The writing is already on the wall that XRP is the preferred DA of choice because they actually have a focused use case. If the ecosystem around XRP creates new use cases through Xpring or other ventures; GREAT!! If not, Ripple has still achieved far more than any other DA on arriving at the doorstep of widespread adoption.
  7. 5 points
    So there was a video on twitter with a high level person at HSBC a few months ago: Now, I'm wondering if what he's mentioning involves Corda Settler and XRP. I think it is one of the three options if you look at the news in the last few months as HSBC has been testing with Corda Settler(although no mention of XRP during tests) However, there are two other options as there is also news of HSBC testing with IBM Blockchain(pretty exntensively): https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2018/07/03/blockchain-bank-ibm/ They could end up using Worldwire as well Or I think perhaps the most likely, with USC(utility settlement currency). I think this option is likely because HSBC is on he 17 bank consortium that developed this system and R3 tried to bid on them in June but was rejected. https://www.coindesk.com/r3-rejected-utility-settlement-coin-blockchain I made a video about this, which one do you guys think is most likely?
  8. 5 points
    Deutsche Bank Confirms HSBC and Xoom As Ripple Clients https://thexrpdaily.com/index.php/2019/01/16/deutsche-bank-confirms-hsbc-and-xoom-as-ripple-clients/
  9. 4 points
    This time PoW is going the beating. http://galgitron.net/Post/Proof-of-Not-Working
  10. 4 points
    HSBC's "FX Everywhere" project is being used to coordinate payments across HSBC's internal balance sheets using a shared ledger.
  11. 4 points
    I personally don't think their XRP holding is a hindrance for xRapid adoption amongst their clientele. Ripple's distribution of XRP is not following lock-step in the likes of other platforms where most are randomly giving their respective digital assets away via airdrops unless it is strategic to the interest of building Ripple's and the XRP-Ledger's ecosystems (i.e. xPring, UBRI, and RippleWorks). Selling all of their XRP holding to the IMF or the US Fed doesn't make much sense either, because they're a global technology firm where most of their partnerships are outside of the US. The goal for Ripple is to distribute XRP amongst their partner exchanges initially and then ultimately to banks, central banks, corporates, and FIs to hold on their balance sheets once we have consistent and coherent regulations in place. As xRapid expands the distribution of XRP will increase. As far as we know, banks and central banks are already holding digital assets. Just dumping/selling-off XRP is not a strategic distribution/utilization of the digital asset in my opinion. This fear of Ripple dumping XRP on the open market has already been acknowledged and rectified via the Escrow of XRP. I think Ripple's distribution process for XRP is spot-on.
  12. 3 points
    The fact that other players are moving into the remittance market shows it is probably the most imminent , prescient use case for blockchain tech. Ripple has first mover advantage.
  13. 3 points
    http://www.atimes.com/article/alibaba-launching-pakistan-blockchain-remittance-program/
  14. 3 points
    Eventually XRP has to get to a point where there is high liquidity, high volume and yes a high but not outrageous price but high enough where every day people like myself will no longer be able to buy it in bulk. Just take this into account say Ripple released all their XRP on the Market You would see prices tank, whales buy in heavy bulk and hold There would essentially be no accountable party then holding the bulk FI's wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole in those circumstances especially to move fiat are you serious? Ripple is looking at the accountability factor that regulation and business require when it comes to handling money because at the root of it all XRP and the tools that utilize it handle money so we need it to be governed in such a way that it adhere' to all the laws that govern money in various lands. I do think when XRP rises to it's potential the price will go up fast and in doing so it will only be made available on institutional exchanges because there will be no value for Ripple, FI's and other entities in individuals holding the token so for those of us who have got in before the real use case kicks in enjoy and get more while you can!!
  15. 3 points
    All joke aside, I'm happy to be married, for 37years now, with a very very nice, lovely and sweet women who even likes and laughs with my awful jokes and humor.... What more can a man want?
  16. 3 points
    well then, i dont think its accurate to call developers "the market". right? lets assume this is true (im no developer btw) - i dont think xrp's success is depending on more developers in the first place - it's usecase is clear and besides ripple, r3, sbi etc pushing it's main usecase, coil is a great and powerful addition to the xrp ecosystem overall. what developements on ethereum are really groundbreaking in your opinion (besides the ico-boom from 2017)? i'd like them more to be laserfocussed on the main usecase(s) than spreading the peanut butter too thin Biggest Ethereum Development Firm, ConsenSys, May Lay Off 50~60% of Firm’s Workforce https://www.newsbtc.com/2018/12/20/ethereum-consensys-lay-offs/ they do not like ripple the company? or XRP? or both? and what are they saying why they dont like it? is it the source code of xrpl or is it that they just hate (like most eth and btc maxis) what ripple is doing in the space? what an answer no because the question still stands - are you invested in xrp? if yes, why? if not, why are you here? and i still would love to hear valhalla's intentions and opinions btw
  17. 3 points
    sounds promising but I sure aint getting as excited as many of the youtubers about this as some small branch/departments who does gawd knows what having a play with ripple doesn't mean a new world order, plus the evidence itself wasn't overly set in stone let alone recent. For all we know they are just some techies trying out the tech. Not that that can't lead somewhere & we know lots of good noises coming from the UN & XRP folks have ties in with them BUT it's not a confirmed use case or even a trial really.
  18. 2 points
    We have to take the Triffin dilemma into consideration. We know the Federal reserve and central banks around the world have been thinking about this conundrum since the 60s. In reality it has been sort of commented on for milllenias by people like Machiavelli and Roman historians and emperors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triffin_dilemma Some sort of liquid digital asset could possibly solve this if the cards are played right. It will have to start as a small thing that gains trust over time in many markets and usecases. Projects like USC (started by UBS and Clearmatics in 2015) are doing something very different from this. The XRP-ledger can be developed on by anyone for anything they want.
  19. 2 points
    DarkHorseXRP

    The Real Price of XRP

    The real price is the price of the market ! At this time, its' around $0.33.
  20. 2 points
    You'd just need to re-key the accounts and disable the master keys. That costs you a few hundred drops, not a few hundred XRP.
  21. 2 points
    PG1

    The Real Price of XRP

    IMO there was a manipulation pump around the time of the futures launch. FOMO kicked in and it was then a retail-fuelled bull run. The manipulators (which to me are in large part shady exchanges) are then among those selling into the retail FOMO. Manipulation and retail FOMO both play a part. Obviously, we're always searching for significant price levels using a slew of indicators and otherwise. I think the OP has an interesting take. All crypto became over-hyped & overpriced during that run. And now XRP seems very undervalued with all that has happened since the .7 pre-run water mark. I don't know that I would use the term 'real price' but .70 has significance. If we can push past that water mark again it may be game on.
  22. 2 points
    Million dollar question that one, maybe that old foe "greed", waiting for one more large pump, when you have a lot of companies, bakt, fidelity and some others expressing their interest in pow , the only two the sec has publicly stated that are not a security, they can smell the money that's coming, then they would dump , thats mý uneducated guess, that's the USA side of things as I see it imho , the rest of the world is not waiting, @GiddyUp said on the forum today "it's like a pot boiling with the lid on " that's how I summarize the feeling out there.
  23. 2 points
    Interesting. I read the last page you have listed "Casting Light on Central Bank Digital Currencies". I get the feeling the Central Banks do not understand digital assets. Here's what they said in that paper: "22. Cryptocurrencies are different along many dimensions and struggle to fully satisfy the functions of money, in part because of erratic valuations. Examples include Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Ripple. These currencies are not the liability of any institution and are not backed by assets. Their value is usually volatile, because most have rigid issuance rules. Some new cryptocurrencies attempt to stabilize their value by controlling issuance according to a function of price deviations from a fiat currency or commodity (as in an exchange rate peg). Examples are Basecoin and Stablecoin.20 In all cases, transactions are settled in a decentralized fashion, using distributed ledger technology." And then in the article "Going Cashless": "And then there is the emergence of crypto assets. I do not consider these so-called currencies to be money, as they do not fulfill the three essential functions of money—to serve as a means of payment, a unit of account, and a store of value. This view is shared by most of my colleagues. Crypto assets’ main contribution is to show that financial infrastructure can be built in a new way with blockchain technology, smart contracts, and crypto solutions. Although the new technology is interesting and can probably create value added in the long run, it is important that central banks make it clear that cryptocurrencies are generally not currencies but rather assets and high-risk investments. The clearer we are in communicating this, the greater the chance that we can prevent unnecessary bubbles from arising in the future. We may also want to review the need for regulatory frameworks and supervision for this relatively new phenomenon." Companies like Ripple have a lot of work to do on the side of educating these people. I get it now why they are after the lower hanging fruit first. Edit: Although Christine Legard somewhat gets it, though she still needs to research xrp a little more: "1. Virtual currencies Let us start with virtual currencies. To be clear, this is not about digital payments in existing currencies—through Paypal and other “e-money” providers such as Alipay in China, or M-Pesa in Kenya. Virtual currencies are in a different category, because they provide their own unit of account and payment systems. These systems allow for peer-to-peer transactions without central clearinghouses, without central banks. For now, virtual currencies such as Bitcoin pose little or no challenge to the existing order of fiat currencies and central banks. Why? Because they are too volatile, too risky, too energy intensive, and because the underlying technologies are not yet scalable. Many are too opaque for regulators; and some have been hacked. But many of these are technological challenges that could be addressed over time. Not so long ago, some experts argued that personal computers would never be adopted, and that tablets would only be used as expensive coffee trays. So I think it may not be wise to dismiss virtual currencies."
  24. 2 points
    Thanks @mDuo13, well explained. Triggered by @Sukrim I created a little script that checks if RFC6979 is used on a transaction by replaying an old transaction with the newest ripple-lib (which uses RFC6979). If the old transaction uses RFC6979, then the resulting hash will be the same. I think it works pretty ok, but no guarantees that it works 100% . I checked some of my accounts and indeed most of them make the cut somewhere at August 2015, depends of course which client was used and when that client was updated to use a newer version. For those interested, here is the script (careful with those secrets, clear your shell history afterwards): const { RippleAPI } = require('ripple-lib'); const txHash = process.argv[2]; const secret = process.argv[3]; const rippledService = 'wss://s2.ripple.com'; const api = new RippleAPI({ server: rippledService }); (async () => { await api.connect(); const transaction = await api.getTransaction(txHash, {includeRawTransaction: true}); const rawTx = JSON.parse(transaction.rawTransaction); delete rawTx.meta; delete rawTx.TxnSignature; delete rawTx.date; delete rawTx.hash; delete rawTx.inledger; delete rawTx.ledger_index; delete rawTx.validate; const signed = await api.sign(JSON.stringify(rawTx), secret); console.log(JSON.stringify(transaction.specification, null, 2)); console.log("New txHash:", signed.id); console.log("Old txHash:", txHash); api.disconnect(); process.exit(0); })().catch(err => { console.error(err); })
  25. 2 points
    RFC6979 wasn't even published until Aug 2013, which is after the XRP Ledger was created. It's certainly likely that some software that's been around since the beginning uses random nonces instead of deterministic nonces, which is still secure as long as they're truly random. If they're less random, that's a problem. It is my understanding that prior to around August/July 2015, the rippled server used OpenSSL instead of libsecp256k1 for signatures. The OpenSSL implementation does not (did not at the time?) use deterministic nonces, but rather uses random nonces. As long as the source of randomness was strong enough (depends on your system, but probably yes) then you're probably OK. I dug into the history of ripple-lib and couldn't find anything one way or the other on the signing implementation prior to around July/August 2015. It's hard to say whether someone is actually affected, though, even knowing what code they used to generate their signatures. Most people won't be affected unless they made a lot of signatures with questionable software... but it's a sliding scale—the less random your nonces, the fewer signatures it takes to figure out your private key. The extreme case is if you reuse the exact same nonce it only takes just two signatures. Incidentally, this is the exact mistake Sony made with the PS3 back in like 2011. They used the exact same nonce on every signature... oops. Long story short, it's not a bad precaution to rotate your keys anyway. BTW, credit for actually writing the article goes mostly to @nikb. I just proofread and posted it.
×