Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Haha
    zerpian got a reaction from jcdenton in Does progmatic sells benefits XRP ecosystem?   
    Energy bill is actually denominated in kWh, the counter value in fiat depends on where you live. 
  2. Thanks
    zerpian reacted to hallwaymonitor in Ripple Lawsuit Tracker (December 2018 Update)   
    I'm not law a guy but after reading this tweet I will not expect this class action to end during 2019.
  3. Like
    zerpian got a reaction from hallwaymonitor in Hi! I'm Bob   
    Hi @BobWay, I really enjoy reading your posts. Thanks for spending time enlightinging us, please continue sharing your knowledge/insights/ experience,..
    Ben seems to be very good in figuring new names. I somewhere read (cannot find the article) he is also the name giver for cinnamon (cinema + money)...
    Regarding the inbuilt exchange, Beachhead (a VR game) has committed to use xrpl for exchanging in game tokens and other game tokens
    Thanks again!
  4. Like
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hello! I'm the 'Head of Community' @ Ripple :-)   
    I'm hoping @peebo38 is still around at Ripple and available to pop in occasionally.
    I had an idea that might be helpful in improving Ripple <> Community relations.
    Ripple holds company status meetings pretty often. I forget if it is every week or every two weeks. It is a simple affair around breakfast or lunch time where Brad and other members of the leadership team brief the company on the latest developments. Because Ripple is a global company with employees in lots of timezones, there is also a video feed that remote team members can join. To help include people in different timezones, the time of the meeting shifts. That's why I said breakfast or lunch. This is significant because there is often food to help encourage everyone to show up.
    At the end of these meetings, they often set aside time for questions from the Ripplers. I was thinking that if we gathered question that people had here into a short coherent list, perhaps we could get Claire to submit them to the leadership team in advance. Then she could report back "official answers" from any questions the leadership team cares to answer.
    Is that a lame suggestion?
    It seems a less interruptive way of getting timely answers without dinging David and Nik all the time.
  5. Like
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hi! I'm Bob   
    I'm going to go and try to figure out the club feature now. If I've missed your question I'm sorry. Please repost it if you'd like to call my attention back to it.
    Thank you all for listening. Sorry to be so long winded.
  6. Like
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hi! I'm Bob   
    Sure, full disclosure wouldn't hurt.
    No, I'm not working for Ripple in any capacity at the moment. Not that I'm against doing so (do you know how much my COBRA insurance costs!) If they'd like me to come back and do exactly what I'm doing now for pay (or even just insurance) I'd be happy to do so. But that position would have to come with the independence to say and do what I personally think is best for the community (and myself).
    I retired from Ripple for three reasons:
    Stefan was leaving to start Coil with many of the others from the research team that I was on. I really love Stefan. We are the best of friends! We both have huge respect for each other's skills. Together we make a great team. He sees the world one way. I seem to see the world from exactly the opposite direction. (like looking through different ends of a telescope.) But together we manage to synthesize our different initial viewpoints into amazingly unexpected final products. But Coil is in SF and I was/am happy to be back in Texas. Stefan had a specific vision he wanted to pursue and I knew that and support it. I have a different specific vision I want to pursue and he knows that and supports it. So I did not want to go work at Coil and distract them. But I'm not ruling out collaborating in the future. Ripple offered me two great options: I could stay working remote in another position  I could take a very generous (in my scale) severance package. I had recently been diagnosed with prostate cancer and I've been struggling with diabetes. Ripple didn't know this at the time. I chose to take the nice severance package (Thank You Ripple!) and concentrate on my health. Since that time I've had radiation treatment for the prostate cancer and that seem to be responding nicely. I've also been (with huge help from my wife) changing my diet and getting more exercise. My weight is starting to fall and my glucose levels are responding nicely.
    Of course, leaving also gave me the opportunity to pursue my "new crypto moonshot" as well. It turns out that will require me to step up publicly as a leader in order to promote that project. I'm not particularly comfortable being a "public frontman". So coming here gives me the opportunity to practice (pretending) being comfortable in public. And it also allows me to serve my own long-term personal financial interest as well by promoting Ripple and the RCL (I'm not a fan of the name XRPL)
    So that's all about me. Let's talk a little more about Ripple.
    As I mentioned in an early post, I was the first integration engineer for OpenCoin. I worked on the business development team for Patrick Griffin. My role was to talk to EVERYONE who was interested in doing anything with the Ripple ledger. I'm not inherently smart about the things I'm telling y'all. I'm only informed because very smart people kept asking to me with us to discuss their problems. My job was to figure out how to help all of them, no matter the industry, at that time. So if you go back to 2013 or 2014 with Ripple, you probably know me.
    I was also asked by Nilesh Dusane to join his brand new sales team as the first sales engineer. We had worked together in BD while I was the only integration engineer. It turns out we split my original position into three separate departments. (Integration Engineering, Sales Engineering, and Customer Support) So I was happy to jump in and support Nilesh. He was the one that proposed that Ripple "try to sell our system" rather than give everything away for free. He postulated that having a zero price was actually a barrier to entry for banks rather than a facilitator. He formed the sales team to test that hypothesis. He was absolutely correct!
    In my role of sales engineer I talked to almost every bank and banker we could get a meeting with. Sales is an interesting process. The grownup decision makers talk and decide there might be value in the proposition. But often the people high enough to green light a project don't have enough technical foundation to know if they are being bulls***ed. So at some point during the sales process, the grown ups always say something like, "It all sounds good, but I'd like you to talk to our technical lead and see...(reasons change here)  ...but what is really doing is calling in a tech expert to play "tech jeopardy" with me in order to sniff out whether what we promised is real. The only way I know to play tech jeopardy without being called out for bulls*** is completely honestly. Sometimes painfully honestly. Because really, I'm not a sales guy, I'm an integration guy. I DIDN"T want to do a deal if the goals were impossible for the integration team to meet.
    Did I mention that I was very outspoken within Ripple?  I believe in being brutally honest with every Rippler. Even about our warts. This is because everyone commits to work WAY TOO HARD when they come onboard. You really need to make a strong personal commitment and you can't make it based on bulls***.
    So curiously, some here might get a laugh out of this, while I talked to crazy numbers of people in my official capacity as sales and integration engineer...
    ...I was never officially allowed to speak to the public or press about Ripple! Go figure huh?  I think the term I heard was loose cannon. Maybe because I was boring here.
    So, 100% no. My discussion here is not Ripple sanctioned.
  7. Thanks
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hi! I'm Bob   
    Oops, I meant to add this link to the above post. I can't speak for its conclusions, but the description of the problem is worth understanding.
    I just googled this one up because I've read others before. But if you haven't read anything like this, you should do your own googling.
  8. Like
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hi! I'm Bob   
    As promised, I didn't go to bed before finishing monstrosity. It is the delayed continuation of the post I left hanging here. Sorry for the delay.
    I've had a long love/hate relationship with bitcoin. When I first heard about it I was inthralled with the technology. I dug in deep to understand everything I could. It seemed like a global LETS system to me. There were a few things I didn't like. It wasn't very private even though everyone kept calling it anonymous. I was one of the first to point out how the DAG could be used to unmask people. I may also have been one of the first to describe the mixer concept. I kicked around some ideas for a next generation more private blockchain data structure with Satoshi. I wasn't cryptography savvy enough to make that work, but I was happy when the zerocoin folks worked it out.
    But the one thing I always hated about bitcoin was the monetary policy, I made that clear with my first post on bitcointalk. I thought and still think that volatile cryptocurrencies make lousy "money".
    Medium of exchange                  -- OK, that works Unit of account                            -- Hum? Is it really a consistent "measure of value" Standard of deferred payment -- Nope, you can's agree to BTC denominated rent or other contracts Store of value                              -- Not really, store implies you get the same value out you put in
    It turns out bitcoin is much better described as a commodity than a currency. This argument did not win me popularity either.
    Over the next three years I explored other monetary policies and spent a lot of time trying to work out how to make a stable valued cryptocurrency. It was during that exploration that I discovered Ripple. It turns out Ripple is a uniquely suitable platform on which to build a stable coin.
    By 2013 there were a lot of bitcoin maximalists pumping BTC. There pitch went something like this:
    The Dollar is going to crash! The Euro is going to crash! People are going to NEED to use BTC. The whole world's financial system is going to hell! You can buy BTC now and be RICH! Or you can buy BTC later with the poor people. I thought that was a pretty sucky marketing plan. "The whole world's gonna be miserable, but hey, we DESERVE to be rich! We didn't actually do anything. But we did happen to notice this weird thing on Slashdot first!" I thought that pitch was lamely transparent even for a scammer. I didn't expect many to fall for it.
    It was in that context that I made the comments that kicked off the request for comment. Keep in mind that when Ripple launched OpenCoin was giving away XRP. Please read at least the first page here. You'll see that there was an organized campaign to call Ripple a scam right from the beginning. Crypto is a hostile environment.
    The initial amounts given were 50,000 XRP. Note Jed was first in line. Also note that Vitalik Buterin was on the first page. That XRP amounts tapered down over time. By the time I discovered Ripple the giveaway amount was 20,000 XRP. I had begged David for XRP a few days before I received my giveaway amount. I'd been posting in the forum and was way too impatient to wait. He graciously funded my initial wallet with 555 XRP. Keep in mind the account reserve was 200 XRP, and trust lines and offers were 50 XRP each. So 555 only represented a half dozen trust lines and market orders.
    What's most important to the discussion we are having now, and the mindset I had then, is the relative valuation.
    The story I was told is that when PayPal launched, they gave everyone who signed up at the beginning $10. At the beginning of the giveaway OpenCoin considered 50,000 XRP to be worth about $10. ($0.0002 in Feb 2013). By May, people in the forums had been speculating that XRP would reach $5 by the end of the year. I had shouted down a few of those speculation threads, and that was what I was referring to when I wrote this:
    I thought such outlandish speculation made Ripple actually sound like the scam others were claiming it was. I also thought that most of the speculators had no idea what the "rippling" concept in Ripple actually was. Most were just happy they had gotten free crypto since the bitcoin faucet had long ago dried up.

    Now in retrospect, I made two bad presumptions in the 4 points I made in that original post.
    First, I was a Ripple maximalist and presumed that OpenCoin wanted all 6 billion people on the planet to have their own Ripple address on ledger. Having a Ripple address means needing some amount of XRP for the account reserve and trust lines. The average amount 6 billion people would pay just to have an account is pretty small. ($1 would be a pretty high barrier to entry in poorer regions)
    That was what I was referring to here:
    Say 6-8 billion people and add in a couple billion businesses. You are looking at 10 billion addresses. That averages to only 10 XRP per address. Now you have to consider some of that is locked into the account reserves. If you support the local currencies as well, that's at least 10 billion trust lines and and offer reserves. The reserves will need to fall into drop amounts at that point. Otherwise there isn't much XRP to use for transaction fees.
    The use of trust lines to represent local fiat currencies was what I meant by "unlimited supply" here:

    All in all, it didn't seem to me that XRP was being considered by OpenCoin as a common payment denomination. (Meaning to specify the price of goods or services in XRP rather than in USD) It was pretty clear OpenCoin saw XRP as a bridge currency, but that would be hidden from most Ripple users who continued to hold and spend their local fiat currency.
    This third point I have discussed in at least a couple of other places in this thread. This logic is still sound.
    I began to realize my presumption about 10 billion on ledger addresses was incorrect shortly afterwards. 

    The second bad presumption I made was that OpenCoin was manipulating XRP prices by selling off enough XRP to keep the price stable. (Remember I'm a fan of stable money) Stable XRP value seemed such an obvious precursor to XRP becoming a bridge currency, that I couldn't see any other way that could happen. (Why stable currencies make good bridge currencies is a longer discussion that I'll make in my "book" but you are probably bored of this already.)
    This presumption was what I was referring to in 4a:
    I learned much to my surprise that OpenCoin had never even considered manipulating the market price to increase stability! I never saw any inclination to do during my tenure either. So clearly I was wrong about 4a. If you are holding XRP like I am, I don't have any reason to believe that Ripple is competing against you and attempting to hold down XRP prices.
    That also invalidates my 4b crack about greater fools. But really that was just a rude crack made at the expense of the folks who were speculating in the forums in 2013. To them, and anyone here who was taken aback, I offer my humble apologies.
    Now if I ended the story here and referred you back to this post about upward XRP price pressures, I could rationalize this as a "more optimistic ending"...
    ...but come on. Do you really think I'm that lame? This whole story would make me sound like I'm just one of those lesser fools I mocked, waiting for the greater fools to show up. I'm not that kind of d***.

    So I'll leave you with something that just might make your head explode. But I'll have to say this very carefully using words that I've already heard authorized Ripplers say in public. Hopefully, that will keep me out of trouble...

    It's conventional wisdom that the one thing you can't do by giving away an asset like XRP--is make its price go up. 
    Except one day, a while back, Stefan proposed a concept in which it might... 
    I was quite reticent to believe it. It seemed intuitively impossible, much like you are thinking now. So I sat down to analyze it. And analyze it. And analyze it... And in the end I concluded his exact proposal was wrong. It was likely to put downward pressure on the prices of XRP.
    But, Stefan wasn't very wrong. In fact, using his proposal as a starting place, I tweaked the parameters and intermediate goals and came up with a mechanism that I'm completely convinced will work. It leads to a net upward pressure on the price of XRP...
    ..and Ripple and I received a patent for it.

    Now I don't speak for the company so I can't say if they'll ever deploy the system. I can't say they won't either. But I can say that I know at least one method exists that defies the above conventional wisdom.
    Hopefully, that is optimistic enough to make up for any panic triggers you might have suffered! 
  9. Thanks
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hi! I'm Bob   
    I'm trying really hard not to give away too many details before I've established the background ecosystem so everyone can understand the wonkiness.
    But because you asked in such a well thought out way, it would pain me too much not to respond directly. I'll respond with some brief bullets here. That way you think deeper about it while waiting for me to document the background.
    The core problem and goal is establishing XRP as a bridge currency. The key questions you have to ask yourself are: Can it conceivably be done? What is needed to make that happen? Everyone with a cryptocurrency believes theirs will become the de facto bridge currency owing just to popularity. Bitcoiners have been presume in this from the beginning. But they are wrong. It is really, really hard to unseat USD as the world's bridge currency. Why? Because USD has a stable predictable value. Stable valued things are great to price and compare other things against. But mostly because volatility means RISK to market makers. They want to buy low and sell high WITHOUT the market moving. And it is these traders money, the deep tips of the book, that defines the concept of liquid. But it gets worse. Using any cryptocurrency as a bridge asset in the way everyone proposes seems ALMOST impossible. Why? You need to deploy TWICE as much capital to create the same liquidity needed for a non-bridged payment. To send $1,000,000 through the EUR/USD book for delivery in EUR requires $1,000,000 of EUR be available for sale in that book. To send the same amount of money, first through the USD/XRP book AND ALSO through the XRP/EUR book requires $2,000,000 of capital be deployed. $1,000,000 worth of XRP must be available for purchase in the USD/XRP book. And, $1,000,000 worth of EUR must be available for purchase in the XRP/EUR book. That EUR and XRP has been invested by market makers who are looking to make a profit on their investment. This profit is represented by the spread they are willing to offer. Think of the spread as a type of "fee" that will be paid in order to deliver the payment. So if you want to make the above payment and you have two otherwise equal "instant" payments pathways, which of the two above options do you automate your choice?  Well, you choose whichever one is CHEAPEST of course! Hum, so how does pricing actually work? The first path has to pay one fee. (equal to half the market spread in that book) The second path has to pay two fees. (half the spread in the USD/XRP book, plus half the spread in the XRP/EUR book) So, if you want the second path to be cheaper than the first path, each spread has to be less than half as wide as the first path. And worse... Crypto volatility INCREASES the spread! Each market maker needs to account for the pricing uncertainty in the spread they quote. They have no more idea than you do, if the market is going to move up or down over the next few minutes or seconds. If it moves rapidly, their market making profits can be quickly eaten up by the fact that they end up on the short end of every trade. Market making is a zero sum game. The best price gets the trades. If one trader always quotes the narrowest spread, that trader gets EVERY trade. The second narrowest spread trader can end up with no profits at all. So this is VERY competitive. But in aggregate, successful traders CAN'T quote spreads narrower than the volatility will allow. Or by definition they become unsuccessful traders and don't last long in the business. So what is required for crypto as a bridge currency to even be considered plausible? First you have to remember, "It's a profit deal!" Market makers are going to do what makes THEM the most money. Wider spreads don't necessarily result in higher profits. (see zero sum game above) Spreads * Trades = Profit So having a lot of trades at a small spread, can easily beat having a few trades at a higher spread. Deployed capital matters hugely. If I need $1,000,000 on deposit and I make $50,000 a year trading, I might think that sucks. If I only need $10,000 on deposit and I make $50,000 a year trading, I might think that is SUPER! In fact as deployed capital goes to zero, return on investment tend toward infinity. That is fun for competitive people. So let's be clear here: Market makers can't quote a very narrow spread in a volatile market or they'll lose money. They can't deploy a lot of capital against few trades or they'll lose the opportunity to make more money. Nobody can artificially manipulate the market to stabilize the crypto bridge currency, or they'll go to jail. And obviously, everyone in crypto wants their asset's price to rise overtime and never go down. So without manipulating the market or even inadvertently causing the price to "temporarily" drop as you bootstrap... Is a cryptocurrency becoming a bridge currency even plausible? I'm telling you, I think it is.
    I'll leave the details up to you graduate students to work through.
  10. Like
    zerpian got a reaction from The_Mainlander in Hi! I'm Bob   
    Hi @BobWay, I really enjoy reading your posts. Thanks for spending time enlightinging us, please continue sharing your knowledge/insights/ experience,..
    Ben seems to be very good in figuring new names. I somewhere read (cannot find the article) he is also the name giver for cinnamon (cinema + money)...
    Regarding the inbuilt exchange, Beachhead (a VR game) has committed to use xrpl for exchanging in game tokens and other game tokens
    Thanks again!
  11. Like
    zerpian reacted to JoelKatz in Hi! I'm Bob   
    We certainly would never discourage anyone from using the XRPL's distributed exchange feature! I'm still a bit sad that our strategy lead us in a different direction and that we abandoned the nascent ecosystem we had been building. It was clear that the feature was way ahead of its time and there was no direct path to adoption then.
    I talk to Ethan (head of Xpring and pretty much everything at Ripple other than cross-currency payments) frequently about whether there are good use cases for the ledger's decentralized exchange now and whether that's something we can use Xpring to help develop. I have a plan that moves us in that direction that I've been working on and shown to several people inside the company. The problem I keep coming back to is that there isn't quite a great use case that I can see how to move to a product just yet. But getting more minds thinking in that direction might yield results and time has brought the rest of the world in this direction.
    The other thing that Arthur and I built into the ledger in the early days is community credit. That is, I think, even further ahead of its time and even harder to see a solid use case for in the near term. I sometimes feel like I work for Twitter in 2000 and I'm trying to explain to everyone that for us to really grow, people need better phones. Of course, there was no Twitter in 2000 -- it was too early. I'm trying to find ways to make it later as quickly as possible.
  12. Like
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hi! I'm Bob   
    Hello all. Just wanted to introduce myself. I'm Bob Way, formerly of Ripple. Thank you in advance for allowing me to join your forum.
    Back in the early days of crypto I was pretty active in the Bitcointalk and Ripple communities (under the username "Red"). In fact my community participation was what directly led to me going to work for Chris and the gang at OpenCoin. I made a lot of good friend in the forums five years back. I'm hoping to make some new ones now.
  13. Thanks
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hi! I'm Bob   
    This is a great couple of questions. I feel handicapped by not having a whiteboard to draw on in answering. Excuse my ASCII art...
    The best way to think of XRP usage is in the context of Alice and Bob. But in the current world where neither Alice nor Bob know anything about XRP.
    Alice is part of an ecosystem of payment senders. The Alice's of the world work their day jobs and receive and hold their money in the local fiat currency. (Alice) ----@ (Bank A)     So in Ascii art, "Alice hold her money in an account at Bank A" Bob is part of an ecosystem of payment receivers. The Bob's of the world also hold their money in their local fiat currency. (Bank A) @----- (Bob).     "Bob holds his money in an account at Bank B" In drawing it out, you ALWAYS end up with a graph. That graph tells you if and how money can flow and how much it will cost along each path option.
    (Alice) ----@ (Bank A) @---- (Mark) ----@ (Bank B) @---- (Bob).    "Mark holds accounts at both Bank A and Bank B" He allows money to flow through his accounts. Note: These are the types of diagrams the Ripple graph was intended to explore.
    So notice that I didn't list XRP anywhere in the above diagram. That seems like it sucks at first. But it is worth realizing that what I've done goes beyond Alice and Bob as individuals. What I've done is connect EVERY customer  of Bank A with EVERY customer at Bank B. Meaning I've connected two whole ecosystems.
    If I replace the banks with something larger, then the payment potential gets larger.
    (Alice) ----@ (SPEI) @---- (Mark) ----@ (IMPS)  @---- (Bob).        "Now anyone with a bank account in Mexico can send synchronized payments to anyone in India"  
    But what about XRP? Isn't Mark just going to get rich here trading fiat?
    Yes, but the first step is to get money moving through OUR system (RippleNet). The least scary way (for banks) to do that is via fiat like they are used to.
    XRP comes in as an alternate lower cost path.
    (Alice) ----@ (SPEI) @----------------------- (Mark) ----------------------@ (IMPS)  @---- (Bob)                 We want this path to cost more                       (SPEI) @---- (Mark) ----@ (XRP) @---- (Mak) ----@ (IMPS)                                      We want this path to cost less You can add that path without upsetting the original topology. If a bank is scared of crypto they can pay more. if they want to pay less, they can route through crypto. I'll leave it to you to decide how long you think banks will want to pay more for transactions.
    So a good way to think about Ripple's strategy is as multiple teams building out operational volume in different sections of the graph.
    The xCurrent part of RippleNet is building out operation value on the top line. This includes growing the total pool of "Alices and Bobs". The xRapid part of RippleNet is building out the operation that will assure that the XRP path always costs less. Initially this looks like two disconnected ecosystems, Banks vs Payment Services. But I think it is more insightful to think about it as building operational mastery in different conceptual areas. The payment services xRapid is targeting already use the top line banking ecosystem. They are not closing their bank accounts. They are just augmenting them with additional lower cost paths. One you realize that, it become easer to see how banks can adopt these same lower cost paths with few additional operation changes.
    With that as background, keep an eye on Japan, India, Mexico, and Canada. Then I'd start looking for large markets in South America and East Asia. As I mentioned in a previous post, any countries that are current clearing payments through US banks, but are at risk of "de-risking" account closure are very good candidates to use XRP. This allows them to dis-intermediate the correspondents looking to de-risk them.
    Again, I don't have first hand knowledge of which partnerships are farthest along. But that is the way I analyze the larger financial ecosystem as a whole.
  14. Thanks
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hi! I'm Bob   
    I really hate this question because don't actually have a "gambling gene" in my body. Watching the price of XRP go up and down gives me a huge amount of anxiety. I've actually spent the past six months deliberately NOT looking at the price. I had more than enough stress in other areas of my life.
    But it is a fair question. I think the best answer I can give is to make a parallel with technology. "We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run," Amara's Law.
    I expect there will be price spikes in XRP and other crypto currencies in the near term. However, it is impossible for me to say what the right price is at any instant. I'd like XRP to set new highs over the next year, but really that is just my wishes. I don't have specific information to say "it will happen because of this, that or the other thing".
    In reality, all cryptocurrency prices are set by one thing and one thing only. People's perception of the asset's future utility.
    I personally believe that XRP has a uniquely huge utility value. I'm going to do my best to explain to everyone why I believe that. But do keep in mind that while Ripple the company and XRP the asset are uniquely placed and resourced to succeed. It is possible that individually or collaboratively this all ***** up. I'm going to do my best to make sure that doesn't happen. I hope everyone here will join me in that. 
    Now that I re-read the question I see the part that says "internally at ripple"...
    Several people left fancy jobs and joined Ripple because (I paraphrase) "If we capture even a minor fraction of the international payments market, do you know the value XRP will need to have to support that! Do the math, (really, really big trade number) / 100 billion XRP = Wow!
    Those sort of conversations always buoyed my spirits and made me smile. But really they also gave me anxiety and made me remember that my job was to "make sure we don't all **** this up!"
    Curiously, XRP price speculation conversation are a bit of a sore spot internally at Ripple. The reason for this is the strange imbalance in XRP ownership among employees. It turns out how vested in XRP you are as an employee depends on the time period in which you started working for the company.
    If you started in Ripple's first year or so, you probably bought XRP on your own initiative. If you started after our pivot toward banks and away from the consumer client, you probably didn't buy XRP at all. If you started during the 2017 price run up, you might have bought XRP regularly in your first few months. Keep in mind I bought XRP at around a penny. Then watched it sink over three years to a low of 0.3 cents. That was not too long ago in my mind. So XRP @ 30 cents is up 100X since I took my last vacation. I have to keep that in mind when I'm pining away for XRP @ $3.
  15. Haha
    zerpian reacted to BobWay in Hi! I'm Bob   
    Wow!  I can't believe how many pages there are since I went to bed. I'm going to go back and reply to all of your posts, but I'm going to start out of order. Mostly because this is a fun one!
    Alice and Bob is a bit of a person joke that kind of suck and became important while I was at Ripple.
    I started using Alice and Bob in my examples back in 2010 when I was posting on bitcointalk. It was, of course, a play on cryptography's Alice, Bob and Eve the eavesdropper.
    When I got to Ripple and met Stefan Thomas he told a great story. He said, "When I wrote bitcoinjs I left my bitcoin address in the sample code showing how to send a payment. What's cool is that occasionally random bitcoin just shows up in my account when people run tests!" So of course after that I made sure that everyone in Ripple used Alice and Bob in their payment examples. And more importantly, the money ALWAYS flows from Alice to Bob. 
    A couple of years ago Ripple hired a new head of design. At a team meeting she came up to me and said, "Hi Bob, I'm Alice!" I have a picture of us together somewhere.
    It turns out having a consistent discussion convention is important for clarity and to maintain your own sanity. The convention I enforced at Ripple was:
    Payments were always sent by Alice to Bob. Payment flow diagrams were always drawn so the money flows from left to right. For cross currency payments the "market makers" who set the price were named "Mark" and "Mak". Occasionally "Larry" provides same currency liquidity. Having consistent conventions makes it easy to refer to Alice or Mark (and even "left to right") during walk and talk conversations without needing to break out a whiteboard.
    And yes, I am ~bob = rBWay8KRdmroZra4DTXi6h5cLtPhs5mH7v  Feel free to send me money! 
  16. Like
    zerpian reacted to Julian_Williams in Discontinue xrpcharts.ripple.com   
    I think that Ripple has owned so much stock has been a huge blessing for the successful launch of XRP:
    The money that would have gone into mining went into developing the technology and partnerships The tokens have been escrowed and released and dispersed in an orderly fashion I think the downside is that:
    If XRP becomes adopted as a standard token of value in international finance Ripple (as the owners of 60% of the assets) would become more powerful than the IMF  Such power cannot remain outside democratic control. We are getting to the stage where Ripple needs to provide some sort of plan for the hand-over of the huge reserves of XRP to some sort of governance.  I do not think it has to be done immediately and Ripple needs to ring-fence several billion for the further development of the XRP project in all its forms and the roll out of the Internet of Value.
  17. Like
    zerpian got a reaction from jorgerios in Interview with President Kitao of SBI Holdings "Future of cryptocurrency (Bitcoin) market and prospect of Ripple"(Japanese)   
    XRP the most held crypto by Japanese:
  18. Like
    zerpian got a reaction from VanGogh in Interview with President Kitao of SBI Holdings "Future of cryptocurrency (Bitcoin) market and prospect of Ripple"(Japanese)   
    XRP the most held crypto by Japanese:
  19. Like
    zerpian got a reaction from Esprxp in Interview with President Kitao of SBI Holdings "Future of cryptocurrency (Bitcoin) market and prospect of Ripple"(Japanese)   
    XRP the most held crypto by Japanese:
  20. Like
    zerpian got a reaction from hamasugu in Interview with President Kitao of SBI Holdings "Future of cryptocurrency (Bitcoin) market and prospect of Ripple"(Japanese)   
    XRP the most held crypto by Japanese:
  21. Like
    zerpian got a reaction from Cesar1810 in Interview with President Kitao of SBI Holdings "Future of cryptocurrency (Bitcoin) market and prospect of Ripple"(Japanese)   
    XRP the most held crypto by Japanese:
  22. Like
    zerpian got a reaction from Hodor in Welcome To XRPL Labs   
    @Hodor You're not saying otherwise but let me underline that I do have confidence in Ripple more than any other company or any stakeholder (in case of BTC) in this market.
    Having said that, it feels like there is a lack of strategy regarding the distribution. The only thing we know is the graph but the curve doesn't predict anything. Even if one makes assumptions, it should be somewhat realistic. Missing the curve with billions  is not realistic at all. 
    The distribution should be accelerated by engaging with the community. That's actually my main point I'm trying to make.
    While writing the last paragraph, I had to think about dogecoin. Can someone explain me very simply why this coin is still in top 100?
  23. Like
    zerpian reacted to Hodor in Welcome To XRPL Labs   
    The overall point you're making here is that "they could dump right now and affect the market."  And that's an accurate statement on its face; however, even without the escrow, we (and they) know that an action like that would be highly detrimental to the market for XRP.  We track them close by watching and verifying wallet movements, and they are transparent by publishing their amounts in the markets report. 
    But your point stands as accurate. 
    Well, there are two ways to look at it. 
    The graph assumes that "50% is used per month."  And with Ripple keeping 60% of the most recent quarter's escrow release (I covered that here), the graph could actually be accelerated.  But that assumes that they are actually selling or distributing that 60% that they retained. 
    This is where the transparency ends, because we don't really have detailed insight into how they manage the custody of XRP awarded to specific charities, projects, or Xpring investments.  It's all NDA type of stuff. 
    So I'm not sure I can agree - or disagree with your statement here. 
    Ripple has been more transparent than a lot of other crypto championing organizations, but I think that your overall point is about the 'meaning of crypto', which is, essentially, decentralization, and the elimination of reliance on centralized trust and risk. 
    And centralized token ownership is definitely part of the equation.  Bitcoin has its massive "Satoshi" wallets, Mt Gox Trustee wallets, and early owner wallets.  The Ethereum Foundation has $75 million in Eth.  And while Ripple has placed the majority of XRP in escrow, I agree that it's not an ideal solution to the problem; it basically mimics the release speed of mining in POW. 

    However, there needs to be a way of getting XRP into the hands of free-market participants that will use it for its intended purpose.  And that's a trick that Ripple has to solve at some point. 
  24. Like
    zerpian got a reaction from Hodor in Welcome To XRPL Labs   
    @Hodor I'm glad to see we're on the same page. Your ideas are excellent! Some time ago, I also proposed a variant of staking but honestly I don't care much how the distribution is done as long as it gets distributed. There are a few reasons I'm eager to see xrp distributed as quickly as possible:
    -the escrow is missing its purpose: there is already 6B undistributed xrp + around 700M xrp returning back into escrow every month. If Ripple was to dump, escrow will certainly not prevent them to
    -Ripple published an xrp distribution graph. Although we had a bull run in 2018 - consequently boosted Q1-Q2 sales, the total xrp distributed amounted for 2B. This means - at this rate - we will never reach the milestones on that graph
    - speculation is a knife with two edges. For innovative technologies it's needed to attract capital in the beginning but ignorant investors can burn themselves. E.g. wietsewind would not have found about Ripple, when there was no bull run (consequently no media coverage).  However regulation is around the corner and hopefully it will put a consumer-protective framework (to a certain extent) in place.
    -healthier distribution will only be possible at higher prices, preventing people hoarding huge amounts xrp's and also preventing boom-bust cycles. Take for instance the numerous wallets created and the average holding amount in those wallets compared to pre-2017.
    -'overestimating the short term, underestimating the long term' stems from the inability to value correctly -specially true for crypto- the utility value. On the short term it is made by speculation (hence overestimating) but if you cannot survive this phase there won't be a long term nor an utility value. It's actually based on survival bias. Only focusing on the long term might loosen attention on the short term.
    -finally I think it needs to be done for the sake of transparency and all that blockchain stands for... 
  25. Thanks
    zerpian reacted to automatic in Why is JPM Coin not a threat to XRP ?   
    Sigh...  so much FUDness these days.  Here, let me see if I can clear it up once and for all.
    There are currently three primary ways to send money internationally:
    By leveraging bank-sourced liquidity provided by the correspondent bank network and accessed via Swift (or xCurrent). By using proprietary pools of liquidity and access mechanisms provided by money transfer companies.  These only exist because such businesses spotted the opportunity created by the gaping hole in #1, and quickly moved to fill and monetize the gap. By using crowdfunded liquidity (xRapid exchanges) accessed via peer-to-peer network (xRapid).  In case you don't like the term "crowdfunding", then another way to look at it as "by using money transfer matchmaking service whereby requests to send money from one country are matched with requests to receive money in another country, and fulfillment accomplished via an intermediary money transfer instrument (xrp) bought and sold in individual countries' open markets (xRapid exchanges)" Banks are for-profit businesses whose primary business model is to generate revenue by providing services centered on "money".  Any "money" that banks holds will be expected to generate revenue, and anything that bank touches will likewise do the same.  "Bank sourced liquidity (aka bank-supplied pool of money)" will thus come with inherent cost.  "Correspondent bank network" will also come with inherent cost, similar to how a supply and distribution chain of multiple middle-men comes with inherent cost.
    xRapid cuts out both.  Rather than relying on a pool of money in source and target geographies to execute a transfer, it relies on xrp trade inflows and outflows in respective geographies in order to source volume necessary to execute a transfer.  Transfer liquidity is thus acquired dynamically, rather than pulled from a costly static (aka "backed with actual money") pool.  This - in conjunction with elimination of high touch/high cost traffic through the correspondent middle man network - is what drives the cost down.
    Now, onto JPM Coin -
    JPM coin is backed.  Backed means that for each token there is one dollar sitting somewhere representing that token.  If there is one dollar sitting somewhere, that means there is static bank sourced liquidity sitting somewhere.  If there is static bank sourced liquidity sitting somewhere, then nothing has really changed.
    Does that clear it up?
    Since I'm on a rant here, I might as well continue -
    Looking at the model described above, it should be immediately apparent that the model effectiveness is directly proportional to xrp exchange liquidity.  Low liquidity equals lower cap on transfers that can be performed in this fashion.  Lower cap means that the network in its present state cannot be used by major players as the liquidity needed to handle their volume is not there.  HOWEVER - with each xRapid partner and client coming online, the pool of liquidity will become deeper.  As the pool becomes deeper, this will likewise make it possible for the solution to move up market.
    The disruption in this case will not come from within the same level at which major banks operate today;  instead the disruption will come from BELOW.  It will come from smaller banks and smaller players taking the risk on xRapid as they are getting shafted by the current system and falling victim to the high base rates in their geographies or being too small to establish proper connections or negotiate discounts that would be necessary for them to not get shafted.  Euro Exim Bank.  Banks in SE Asia.  No-name players used as ridicule fodder by certain Forbes authors.  What all of these "experts" fail to realize in all of their glorious nearsightedness is that small players taking a risk on xRapid is a clear indication of a crack in the system - a crack caused by the inability of the current system to provide the level of service (and the cost) needed for the smaller players to remain competitive.  As these small players take the risk of finding the service they need at prices they desire, their doing so will increase the pool of exchange liquidity and allow others to do the same, and pretty soon what is now merely a crack will become a full blown avalanche that is going to bury all these experts and incumbents under so much crap that not even their avalanche beacon signal will be getting through. 
    So let them laugh now from their posh ski lodge at the bottom of the hill.  If this plays out the way I think that it will, soon we will be skiing over 50ft base of the finest powder located where their ski lodge once used to be.
  • Create New...