Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Tyrell

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Global domination with my android army; and dreaming of electric sheep
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. "Contempt of court" sounds sufficient from the judge as well.
  2. Excellent post. I would only add that I think for most folks $589 is not really serious except possibly in your broadly expanded definition. It was always, at least for me, a playful idea (a cartoon bear, for goodness' sake) and most of the people participating carried with them that sense of play. Some took it completely seriously, but that's their decision. Early in the year I felt like $10-15 was a viable target. I still feel that way. Last year I predicted $ 0.35 -- and was I ever wrong about that. It could be less than $10 or higher, but whatever it will be, it will be. I participated in the BG123 club and I kept my mouth shut about any number of things that I found 'out there' -- many of which you outline. To your main point, to repeat -- RESPECT.
  3. Unfortunately, one of the mentioned scenarios is much more likely.
  4. Highly unlikely, still possible. If USD loses its place as a reserve currency and a depression develops it could happen. None of us would want that to happen, but it is possible.
  5. I don't know that it is ignorant so much as highly enthusiastic (or possibly pessimistic from a different perspective), since this would cover a future occurrence and there are many factors that could influence the price negatively and positively. There are folks who predict a possible gold price of $50,000 in future if we return to a gold standard. That seems like a completely outrageous price to me, but it depends on economic expansion and the worth of the dollar. In the short term the dollar is likely to do well, but in the long term... who knows? If there is a worldwide economic meltdown who knows what kind of prices we may see? I'm not predicting that, but it is certainly possible that the fiat-only-economy experiment will turn out to have been a mistake. For all we know a price prediction of $5000/XRP might fit into the "be careful what you wish for" category.
  6. He wants me to source that Western Union charges high fees to cover transfers and that Swift is a messaging system? Sorry, I read it that he wants a source that says Ripple products do not provide these services, but I was not arguing that they do not. My argument was about the implication that current parts of the system referred to in a law from 2010 do not provide these services. They do. They just do it inefficiently.
  7. Yes, for many people it is, particularly if $2500 represents most of their wages for a month. Some folks are just scraping by, and any system that will reduce their costs and put more money in their pocket will be welcome relief. Plus the fact that the fees are potentially higher.
  8. I think you may misunderstand me. I am not saying that Ripple's products do not perform these actions. I am saying that other mechanisms currently exist that also cover this issue -- but they are not very efficient so the price ends up being higher to 'cover costs'. As to it being limited to the messaging layer, I take that from the language offered: "in connection with the remittance transfer, a disclosure describing...." This part of the act covers knowledge of the transaction -- it is there to protect consumers, so they can know what they are getting into -- not the actual transfer itself. So, this is not an issue of the banking sector not being able to meet the demands of Dodd-Frank, but rather Ripple doing it faster, cheaper better. Ripple's products should be the clear choice in future because it will be easy for banks to show that they have complied with Dodd-Frank. This assumes, of course, that the current administration does not act to repeal it.
  9. Isn't that one of the reasons why services like Western Union charge so much? xRapid will do this more efficiently and for far less money, but I don't think remittance providers have been in violation of Dodd-Frank all this time. I have only sent money using Swift cross border a few times, and the fees seemed to be fixed prior to the transaction.
  10. That would imply that an act passed in 2010 provided an impossible situation, a the time, for the banking/remittance industry. I guess I could be reading this completely incorrectly, but this looks like it describes a messaging system. I don't see why xRapid would need to be involved.
  11. Don't think GPI needs to enter into it, isn't this just what Swift does?
  12. Correct, but that was not the context of the argument, which concerned XRP adoption by Coinbase based on its speed and frugality for exchange transfers. It is undeniable that XRP is one of if not the fastest options and it is pretty clearly the cheapest -- for the banking industry and for moving assets from one exchange to another. When it comes to discussing XRP as the global banking choice it simply makes Coinbase look more idiotic. Unless you meant that Coinbase wants to avoid XRP because they hate banks. Which also makes them look like idiots as far as I can tell.
  13. I offered counter-arguments to them 'protecting their BTC'. That was the entirety of the point I made. So, whatever.
  • Create New...