Jump to content


Bronze Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by King34Maine

  1. Can you provide the actual link. It would be nice to pull it up in Google to translate into English.
  2. That's interesting, I thought that Canada was working with R3 to possibly develop a CBDC via project Jasper. What we do know for sure, from both David Schwartz and James Wallis, is that Ripple consulted and worked with many CBs over the past several years to gain insights into what fiscal policy features/characteristics the private XRPLs would need to have to meet their needs. It wouldn't surprise me that Canada would be among the lot to pilot Ripple's CBDC platform. There's so many dots to connect regarding Ripple it's hard to keep up with everything. The company is like an Iceberg. We're given just a sliver of the intel all the while knowing there's so much more going on beneath the surface.
  3. We also know that Brazil is building a CBDC platform prototype in partnership with Ripple from a CEBRA 2021 Powerpoint presentation on "CBDC and the future of payments:"
  4. The pre-agreement is with Ripple because the RMA will be a Ripple partner. Also, this is a "PRIVATE" version of the XRPL and will be a centralized permission-based platform controlled by the managing central bank. This private central bank ledger has nothing to do with the XRPL or the XRPLF other than it's using the open source technology. The XRPLF governs the XRPL not the proprietary private ledger platform Ripple has created for CBs. If I had to guess, Ripple will house these private CB ledger under a subsidiary network within RippleNet. I also believe they will have a customized built-in private liquidity solution (i.e. CBDC ODL) that uses XRP as the bridge asset between the various CBDC private ledgers. Most likely each CB will have a stockpile of XRP to facilitate the transference of each participating CB's CBDC between one another to allow for quick settlement.
  5. Can you clarify what you mean when you say, "None have materialized." Ripple has over +300 partnerships with FIs, Banks, payment providers, etc. all of whom are using various aspects of RippleNet. Some just the bi-lateral messaging network, some the ODL, and some Line-of-Credit. Ripple is well past the pilot phase for these three features of RippleNet. Because ODL and Line-of-Credit utilizes XRP, their use depends on regulatory clarity in both the initiating and destination countries, proper infrastructure (market makers, arbitrage, etc.), and enough liquidity via the corridor. This is the first publicized announcement of a CBDC test pilot for Ripple's Private XRPL with a Central Bank. Literally, the Private XRP-Ledger CBDC platform was just finalized and released for Central Banks to start piloting. The release is actually a month early as David Schwartz said, in the most recent Ripple Drop back in August, to expect the XRP-Ledger CBDC platform within a couple of months.
  6. It also looks like Ripple is expanding its China operations: What I find strange is that Ripple has had boots on the ground in China (Li Yuan – Ripple’s Managing Director for China) going back to the end of 2019 and most likely some time before that. However, the company has been eerily quiet regarding its China operation/developments. By now, I would've expected Ripple to have China listed as one of their global offices and given a similar showcase announcement for Li Yuan, as the company's Managing Director, like they did for Brooks Entwistle and Sandi Young, but not a peep. Matter-of-fact, the only China related partnership that Ripple gave a full-throated announcement was for the LianLian Pay partnership back in 2018. Thanks to@LeonidasH, he was able to do some digging and found some interesting Ripple/China/Malaysia connections a year ago. I think Ripple has something BIG brewing in China. @LeonidasH mentions Ripple’s collaboration/MOU with China’s Asia Pacific Investment Bank (APIB), the Nanjing Financial Technology Research and Innovation Center, and the Bank of Jiangsu. Per the collaboration: “The four parties will work together to advance blockchain-based construction and application of innovative cross-border payment channels of the chain, and on this basis, promote the in-depth application of more financial products such as the conversion of renminbi and small currencies.” More importantly, as @LeonidasH explains, AsiaDB is creating a digital asset platform called Ocliven. This platform was constructed/tested in partnership with technology and financial experts like the Nanjing Institute of Digital Finance Industry, Ripple, and Shanghai Pudong Development Bank among others. Ripple's involvement with AsiaDB's Ocliven digital asset operation management system, sounds very similar to developments with SBI who will be leveraging XRP as part of a global cash management and domestic and international remittances for intra-group settlement of financial obligations amongst companies associated with SBI and those throughout Asia more broadly via FxCoin. FXCoin will develop an XRP based swap market to help increase XRP liquidity as well to hedge the price fluctuation risk associated with using XRP for contract-based business-to-business payments. Once you remove the potential risk associated with Fx rates, only then will institutional players come en masse. The Ocliven digital asset platform is, at its core, a swap marketplace to effectively attract and match different types of asset owners and fund owners, improve the traceability of underlying assets and transparency of asset management.
  7. Great observation, I was kinda thinking the same thing. However, would that apply to Ripple? Afterall, LoC was introduced in October of 2020. Couldn't Ripple still argue fair notice here as well?
  8. I wasn't referring to posts within this thread, but on other social media outlets. Also, just to be clear, my response wasn't directed to @Seoulite but is a reflection of my general sentiments regarding the whole Flare network delay and the subsequent chorus of ppl whining about the delay. Never said that retail users didn't matter, just that they are the first to complain about any/everything that doesn't go according to plan. Developers, in general, have an appreciation for the level of work that's involved in creating a new app, new line of code for a program, or building a new blockchain network. The weight and burden to ensure a successful launch or code merge rests on their shoulders. The only thing "retail" or "regular" people have to do is just use such said app or program. If something goes awry the blame does not go to the "retail" or "regular" user like @Kiwi or @King34Maine. That blame is squarely pointed/levied at the developers/engineers who built such said platform, app, or program.
  9. I really don't understand what the big deal is here anyway. 99% of those BITCHING about the network not having launched don't have the slightest clue or have the capacity to build a new blockchain platform from the ground up. Even worse, that same 99% won't be contributing to the building a new business on the network anyway. The only thing that 99% care about is "When am I gonna get my Spark/Songbird tokens" that they will then turnaround and sell just to make a quick $$$!! The developers who will be utilizing the Flare Network understand the importance of properly testing the network to ensure its viability and I'm quite sure are more than happy to wait. I'm just so tired of ppl acting like ******* wining petulant children!! Matter fact, I hope it takes another 3 months before they launch just to **** some more ppl off!!
  10. Bingo!!!! Which is why it is so fortunate that Ripple's primary focus was the APAC/ASEAN/LATAM/MENA/Europe regions at the outset starting with the partnership with SBI back in 2017. The SBI-Ripple Consortium, I believe, was the pivotal moment of acceptance/validation for Ripple within the global financial sphere. I honestly believe that the SEC had high hopes Ripple would've "thrown in the towel" by now and settle this lawsuit like every blockchain/crypto/fintech company that had come before them. However, what the SEC did not factor in was Ripple's robust and deep-bench of partnerships outside of the US. Having the bulk of its business outside of the US has proven to be most beneficial to Ripple as it has provided the company a safety-net/buffer regarding this SEC lawsuit. WTBS, in a recent interview on Thinking Crypto, Asheesh Birla, RippleNet's GM, provided some insights (09:26 - 11:32) into the possibility of a work-around and/or employing "different tactics" via current partners and/or acquiring various licenses to enable Ripple's US-based partners to reap the benefits of ODL without having to hold or interact with XRP. I'm wondering if Ripple's work-around involves RippleNet's Multi-hop feature that SCB has been utilizing since 2018:
  12. I think he may be referring to Stellar's Franklin Templeton partnership/MOU a couple years back. However, the extent of the partnership was just to have FT's new fund transaction records be recorded on the the Stellar blockchain. Not that FT was tokenizing any securities via Stellar. Not sure what has come of the partnership to date.
  13. BTW, I have your most recent blog post, "KYC Compliant Trading Using GlobaliD and the XRPL DEX" on my bucket list to read.
  14. I don't necessarily feel like they're being reactive, but trying to find the right product/market fit for NFTs. I think Ripple realizes that they can't stand idle while other platforms are experimenting with new blockchain uses cases and products. This is one of the primary reasons RippleX was created besides being a gateway/resource for the XRPL community developers. Ripple's core raison d'etre is still intact around all things payments/value etc., however, RippleX allows them to take risks with new concepts and ideas. To me, I feel Ripple has been very deliberate and strategic in how they approach some of these new use cases so as not to get caught up in all of the preliminary hype that typically surrounds them at the onset. There's a pretty good discussion related to NFTs via the XRPLF's Standards Github portal on Non-Fungible Token Support. Forte's Engineering Leadership posted a wish list of features/functionality they are partnering with RippleX to developed for NFT support on the XRPL. Here's the Forte Engineering Leadership post: "Thanks XRPL team for putting together this comprehensive spec. From our perspective at Forte, the design is thoughtful and would cover many important use cases we have come across with our game developers. We are excited to see it go live! Below I have included a descriptive wishlist from our perspective, that would help make for serving game developers and their deep use in the NFT space. It has a fair amount of crossover with the above insights and comments from the rest of the community, particularly around the transfer fees design and metadata commentary. I have included the bulk of our feedback to do justice to the team's thinking, so apologies for the long windedness. Thanks ahead for enduring Quick takes: This seems like an efficient, stateless NFT design. Structuring NFT management/organization at the user/account/owner level will reduce tracking complexity, which is great. We really like the idea of offers on-ledger, and the idea of a specified take rate on-ledger for the original issuer of an NFT. These are differentiated features and we think they will add value in the ecosystem. More below. This design would cover some of our known use cases, but has some limitations around asset use cases which are useful in games. In particular, we think this design is workable for totally unique, singleton assets. Classic “NFTs”. Adding a stateful field for provenance history verification may be worthy of consideration. See more detailed notes on this below. The design could be used for Semi-fungible tokens per the Further Development section, but some potential snags could exist without some kind of distinct object types and/or modifying the NFT Offer system to allow for both unique/non-fungible tokens and semi-fungible tokens Wish list: (1) Provence Tracking: This proposal works well for totally unique items. At the same time, it doesn’t provide everything one might hope for with respect to totally unique assets. In particular, provenance/ownership history would have to be tracked and verified entirely off-ledger. Of course, provenance and chain of custody can be tracked and verified off-ledger by walking all transactions where a given NFT was transferred. However, doing so would be expensive both to prove and to verify. It may be worthwhile to add a stateful field, updated each time an NFT Object is transferred to a new owner, which could be used as a witness to at least quickly verify off-ledger claims of provenance and custody history. For example, perhaps a custody chain hash field is introduced, such that on creation: ProvenanceHash = hash(issuer), and on transfer: ProvenanceHash = hash(ProvenanceHash, newOwner) With this system, a claim about the chain of ownership could be made off-ledger, and anyone could quickly verify it’s veracity by looking at this proposed field for the NFT object on-ledger and computing the hash sequence of each owner in the purported ownership history chain. Our wishlist proposal here only works for truly unique/non-fungible assets. See our thoughts below regarding semi-fungible assets. Wish list: (2) Issuer-based queries for NFTPages: The NFTPage system will be extremely helpful in reducing the complexity for application developers when trying to find all the NFTs a single user owns. However, in the context of videogames, it is not uncommon for a single game to issue 100-1000’s of items to a single player. When you expand this concept for a user who plays multiple games, this may result in a lot of pages. If so, filtering the NFTPages to select the NFTs which are usable in your application may be expensive. We don’t have a specific solution proposal for this. However, at scale a game application is often the Issuer of the NFTs for the game, perhaps grouping NFTPages by Issuer could make sense, or if implementing an Issuer-based index or query system for NFTPages would be worthwhile. The goal being that a single application can quickly determine which of the NFTs a user owns can be used in their application without having to walk all the pages, but may be too specialized for many other use cases. Comment: (3) Semi-fungible tokens Because non-fungible and semi-fungible tokens have very different semantics, we wonder if it is worth supporting a distinct SFTObject (now or later). Wish list: (4) Transfer Rates: We really like the idea of having an on-ledger field in NFT objects for TransferRate. Even though royalty shares can’t be enforced for off-ledger payments, a designated on-ledger TransferRate could be an important social coordination signal. Enforcing the TransferRate for on-ledger payments may also help normalize the idea that payments should happen on-ledger, and provide a good justification for encouraging the ecosystem supporting NFTs on XRP Ledger structure payments this way. For example, this may encourage more marketplaces that support XRPL NFTs to use on-ledger transactions (and XRP) for all payments. We wonder if it might be worthwhile to modify the Issuer and TransferRate fields such that they form lists. Obviously application developers and other platforms can manage these royalty distributions on their own, off-ledger. But support for multi-party issuance and according transaction revenue splits may be a worthwhile enhancement of the proposal. (mentioned in other user comments as well) Wishlist: (5) Multisig NFT transfers: The current design indicates that an NFTOffer can be fulfilled by agreement between the owner and the receiver of the offer. Would it be possible to add support for a multisig offer where the “Issuer” additionally has to approve the trade as well? Perhaps this could be accomplished with an additional field in the NFT object, specified by the issuer at issuance. Alternatively, could an issuer require that an NFT they issue can only be held in a multisig account to which the Issuer is a party, with a required key? For compliance with BSA/Money Transmittal/AML regulations, it may be useful for some issuers to require their explicit approval of transfers of NFTs. Forte implements a system like this for certain asset exchanges involving tokens defined on EVM-compatible blockchains. Obviously, this idea detracts from self-sovereign property rights, including the right to transfer assets at will, but it may be necessary for some issuers to ensure they can enforce compliant exchanges of valuable assets if they issue those assets. Supporting multisig authorization for any NFT transfer may encourage a broader market with more assets created by more issuers."
  15. There's plans to integrate the XRPL into Mintable's NFT platform. RippleX participated in Mintable's Series A funding round. From the RippleX article I beleive the XRPL's DEX will be utilized here: "The XRP Ledger (XRPL)—with its innate performance advantages and built-in decentralized exchange (DEX)—is ideally suited to deliver a seamless experience for NFTs. In order to reach the next stage of growth, Mintable plans to integrate with the XRPL so creators can securely, sustainably and efficiently sell their works. This is also true for users who wish to purchase NFTs and resell them. The Federated Consensus algorithm - core to the design of XRPL - ensures low-cost transactions and positive implications for sustainability. By being able to cut transaction (“gas”) fees down to $0.0004 on XRPL, Mintable recognizes the opportunity to offer a differentiated user experience that provides a competitive advantage in comparison to other marketplaces. In fact, the XRPL consumes only about 790,000 KWh per year and is already carbon neutral, which is far more efficient than proof-of-work networks that consume around 66 TWh of energy per year. In a nutshell, its environmentally friendly attributes will allow billions of NFTs to be minted, bought and transferred on the XRPL in a sustainable way."
  16. I agree. Unlike with the Private XRPL CBDC ledgers, Ripple cannot unilaterally add new features, like the Federated Side-chains, to the XRPL since such a feature will require a 80% or better vote from validators on the XRPL. David's post is Ripple's way of soliciting input from the XRPL community. Kinda like how Ripple dropped the news back in March that they had been working with CBs on utilizing a private version of the XRPL for CBDCs. Large scale projects like that takes years of planning, preparation, and testing. This is why I feel real confident that this Federated Side-chain Feature is a key component in the Private XRPL CBDC Ledgers and has already been tested throughly by Ripple and potentially CBs.
  17. Being able to abstract burdensome features away from the XRPL to prevent congestion/high fees on the main net like we've seen run-a-muck of the Ethereum platform makes plenty sense in my opinion. Reading David Schwartz's vision for Federated side-chain made it seem as if they are just now exploring this new feature. However, I suspect that Ripple already has a fully operational federated side-chain version built and ready to go for its Private XRPL Ledgers for CBDCs. I expect they will copy and paste a good portion to utilize for the XRPL main net.
  18. Yes, crypto can be very strange at times. Wondering what's your take on El Salvador possibly accepting Bitcoin as legal tender? I can almost imagine that this most likely didn't have the blessings of the IMF/BIS. Not that it has to, but I'm quite sure this development wouldn't sit well with them given that the IMF/BIS most likely coordinated the efforts in transitioning El Salvador from its failed currency (Colon) to the USD back in 2001.
  19. Not yet, but with Hooks it will as I stated in my initial response.
  20. It could very well have been some malware on the phone you used to login to your Coinbase account. There are some very sophisticated spoofing malware out there. Had this one happen to me a year ago: https://iwantleverage.com/security/phishing-attacks-are-more-cunning-than-ever/
  21. Within the RippleX community of developers XRPL Labs is working on native/XRPL-based smart contract functionality via an amendment called "Hooks." Flare Networks is a touring-complete Federated Byzantine Agreement (FBA) smart contract platform. The first Hooked article below explains/details the difference between native smart contract functionality (Hooks) vs Flare Networks (touring-complete). Hooked #1: Smart Contracts on the XRP ledger Hooked #2: Hooks & Security (Smart Contracts on the XRP ledger) Hooked #3: Tech Preview Release (Play with Smart Contracts on the XRP ledger!) Hooked #4: Every Microsecond Counts Hooked #5: Consensus Hooks GitHub Ripple also has Codius which was developed way back in 2015 by Ripple's former CTO, Stefan Thomas (now CEO of Coil and Chairman of the Interledger Foundation). It has been pretty much in stealth-mode since then. In the Codius link I referenced, Stefan goes into the reason(s) Codius has yet to be fully realized. Recently, Stefan added a bit more color to picture on Twitter about how he and Evan Schwartz (Coil Board member and President of the Interledger Foundation) worked on Interledger and Web Monetization to provide the infrastructure that will help facilitate more rapid up-take of Codius (worth a read). On a recent podcast Ripple's current CTO & co-creator of the XRPL, David Schwartz, further elaborates as to the reason(s) Codius has yet to be implemented and his thoughts on Flare Networks.
  22. I'm quite sure you can explain your situation (i.e. needs, expectations, time-line, benefits, costs, etc.) with representatives from Ripple's Sales/Customer Success division via the link provided above. They can forward you information regarding the platform to see if you think that your organization would benefit from RippleNet. Case Studies/Content Library: https://ripple.com/customer-case-study https://ripple.com/content-library/ Quick Guide To RippleNet: https://ripple.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/RippleNet-Quick-Guide-Overview.pdf Note that when researching about the various solutions offered by Ripple you will come across: xCurrent, xVia, and xRapid (now ODL - uses XRP). These were three separate products offered by Ripple until they combined them into a singular platform (i.e. RippleNet). Here's an old Cost Cutting Guide that Ripple put together for banks back in 2016. I'm quite sure a lot has changed since then, but it will give you an idea of the cost/benefits of using RippleNet and/or ODL (formerly known as xRapid): https://ripple.com/files/xrp_cost_model_paper.pdf Ripple's most recent product: https://ripple.com/insights/fund-instant-cross-border-payments-with-a-line-of-credit-from-ripplenet/
  23. Damn bro.....you came back with a vengeance with all of the XRP/Ripple related information....Thanks!!!
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.