Jump to content

Alluvial

Bronze Member
  • Content Count

    398
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Alluvial

  1. @Silkjaer or anyone else who knows the answer. The article by @Silkjaer says: "The stolen funds were not in the custody of Gatehub — they were in accounts Gatehub had custody of the keys for." Which keys are you referring to? My understanding is that there is a "secret key," and with Gatehub there is also a "master key" in some cases, and also a "recovery key." I believe the secret key relates only to the ripple wallet, and the master key and recovery key are to get into the Gatehub account, which gives access to the ripple wallets within the account. Why would Gatehub have the secret keys? I thought those secret keys are only held by the wallet holder. If Gatehub had the secret keys, was that information disclosed by Gatehub on its website or anywhere else? I would think that almost all of us who hold xrp in a ripple wallet believe that the wallet owner is the only person who has the secret key, and no one else. And now it seems that is not always the case. Wondering now what other wallet providers might be holding secret keys. The article also says "Although they do provide custody service through 'hosted wallets', Gatehub is not an exchange, but a gateway to the XRPL decentralised exchange." My understanding is that Gatehub is both an exchange and a gateway (like Bitstamp is both an exchange and a gateway). Not a big issue, but I am trying to better understand what Gatehub actually is. Thank you.
  2. Do we have any additional information regarding why certain Gatehub wallets were hacked (or able to be hacked) and others not? It seems like many of the accounts were migrated from RippleTrade to Gatehub. Is that the case with all hacked accounts? Gatehub offers a "master key" option for customers to get into the account (I believe it's for when the customer forgets the password or when the customer can't get into the account because the customer switches phones and forgets to properly transition 2FA over to the new phone). Did all the hacked accounts have a master key which enabled entry into the accounts? I would think that by now Gatehub would have a pretty good idea of which features or circumstances are the same for the hacked wallets, but Gatehub doesn't seem to be sharing this information with its customers and the community.
  3. I agree completely with your statements, and I have been attempting to make the same points on this forum for some time. The world is ready for a digital currency that is not controlled by any government, and that is easily transferable (4 seconds for xrp) and at a low cost (less than a penny), which is easily divisible, can't be printed and inflated away, doesn't destroy the environment, and can't be taken over (as can happen with mining currencies). No other digital asset, including btc, ltc and eth, comes even close to xrp. Many on this forum and at Ripple have focused almost exclusively on the utility aspect of xrp, which is definitely worth noting (as it's great for facilitating cross-border payments, and eliminating the need for nostro/vostro accounts). But as I have said many times before, the utility component alone does not mean price appreciation. If it's held for seconds or a few minutes just as a bridge currency, that alone will not help us with price appreciation. Like you said, price appreciation will come when xrp is considered a store of value, as money. That being said, I think (to some extent) that Ripple has rightly focused (for now) on the utility aspect of xrp as opposed to xrp being a superior store of value than btc or ltc. And that is because, as you noted, the banks are slightly worried about a digital currency possibly replacing or competing with fiat. Ripple cannot be constantly pumping the store of value/money aspect of xrp, and at the same time promote it to the IMF (by the way, I believe Christine Lagarde, who you mentioned, loves Ripple). My personal feeling, which people on this forum don't generally like, is that Ripple sometimes tries to keep xrp in a stable price range because one of the biggest complaints that banks have about xrp is that it is not stable, and exposes the banks using xRapid to volatility risk. We've been in this range of 0.30 to .31 for what feels like an eternity, and the incredible stability of the price seems unrealistic given the nature of digital currencies. I wouldn't necessarily call it manipulating, but I think Ripple sells into strength and good news to keep the price where it likes it for the time being as it continues to sign new banks. My guess is Ripple is signing so many banks, including central banks, we can't even imagine what is going on behind the scenes. A stable xrp price means (I hope) more bank signings, which means more ubiquity, and more liquidity. I think Ripple has made a business decision to accept a lower price for xrp (for the time being) in order to get significant adoption of xCurrent, xRapid, ILP, etc. I think the strategy makes sense for now. But I hope that the time for challenging btc's store of value status is in the near future - xrp does everything btc does, just 1000x better. If xrp can be viewed as a store of value, like btc is now, then the moon is in the future with the massive gains you are talking about. Given all that, this seems to me to be a great time to establish a large position in xrp for those who have not done so already (but everyone needs to make their own investment decisions). Good luck, and welcome to the forum.
  4. The Coinbase blog says: "Please also note that XRP is not yet available on Coinbase.com or via our mobile apps. We will make a separate announcement when that occurs." The language seems to suggest that the decision to have XRP listed on Coinbase.com has been made, the only question is when it will be available there.
  5. Agree with all your points. I think part of it is the issue of whether xrp is a security. Right now it's a cloud currently hanging over its price. Hopefully, when it is not deemed a security (seems like 99% chance), the true value of xrp will start shining through. I am sure that Ripple is doing all that it can to address the issue. Thank you for your relentless xrp support and advocacy - a true general in the xrp army!
  6. Always a good read! I actually liked the last three paragraphs the most: For thousands of years, the value of coins was closely related to the rare metals they contained, whether gold or silver. Then, within one century, this shifted and governments worldwide decided to experiment with centralized control of monetary units that were tied to the economic fate of nation-states. Due to this approach, a person's lifetime savings could be wiped out by fiscal miss-management of a country. Crypto-assets change all that, and restore money to what it has been for thousands of years, only in a digital capacity. Money is ours once again. XRP is a trust-less, no-counter-party digital asset that you can own, and nobody can take it away from you. This is not true of physical assets, fiat money, or bank-issued debt. Thank you for emphasizing that XRP is an asset which has value in itself - literally a store of value. Often the utility aspect of XRP gets all the attention, when the "store of value" aspect has just as much importance IMO. In addition to being a store of value because it is a "trust-less, no counter-party digital asset that you can own, and nobody can take away from you," XRP is also the best digital asset (for serving as a store of value and money) because it is limited in number, fungible, easily divisible, easily transferable and within seconds at virtually no cost, and not created or controlled by any government which could print more (like they all do with fiat). No other digital asset can do it like XRP. These traits, plus the negative traits of others like bitcoin (mining, scalability issues, environment, cost, transfer time, etc) coupled with the great utility aspect of serving as a bridge currency (elimination of nostro/vostro accounts, immediate settlement, etc), make me wonder: how in the world are we not at #1 yet?
  7. It's possible that Ripple's new counsel could have had a say in this too. A couple weeks ago or so, Ripple announced that new in-house general counsel Stuart Alderoty was hired by the firm to "oversee all legal work at Ripple and manage its global legal, policy and Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) compliance teams, reporting to CEO Brad Garlinghouse." When a new counsel is hired, that attorney comes in and makes various recommendations regarding potential legal issues facing the company. Sometimes the new counsel can be overly cautious about legal matters, and he may have been concerned about the SEC and the "will xrp be deemed a security" legal issue. To be safe, he possibly recommends that Ripple cease (or reduce) doing certain activities that actively promote xrp, including eliminating certain xrp-pushing positions. Just a guess, of course, and I'm not really even sure if Cory's position was xrp-pushing. Could be that Cory just didn't like the job and Ripple decided not to replace him, or that Cory did not fully understand how Ripple and xrp work and was giving inaccurate and/or incomplete information to banks and regulators one too many times. Who knows, could easily be something else. He seemed like a good guy, so hopefully everything works out for him.
  8. This seems very possible, and the most likely reason IMO. It also makes sense given that the position has been eliminated. If the quarterly xrp market reports end, then it is seems a certainty. To me, xrp shouldn't be considered a security even if Ripple is promoting it, but that's another thread.
  9. Brad said "Cory, if we slip back to #3 again, you're toast!"
  10. Your "understanding" is way off base.
  11. With all respect, I think your analysis is way off here. So if gold becomes easily tradable or transferable (because of gold IOUs on the XRPLedger, for example) it will no longer serve as a store of value? If bitcoin were transferrable in seconds and with no fee, it would no longer also serve as a store of value? This makes no sense. IMO, if xrp serves only as a bridge currency, then there is no real demand which is needed to make its price go up. This is because every time that xrp is being purchased, it is, within seconds, also being sold to go into the other fiat. The price of xrp will be based on whether people want to buy and then hold it. It won't be based on those only using it as a bridge token.
  12. Why should bitcoin be the "store of value" digital currency? Brad should be arguing that xrp should be the store of value because it has all the same features as bitcoin (limited in number, not government controlled, easily divisible), but so much better (transfers in seconds vs. up to hours; transfers at no cost vs. many dollars; scalability, mining issues, environment, etc). Utility is great, but without "store of value" status, we will never get to the moon. C'mon Brad.
  13. A couple of years ago Ripple stated it planned to own 50B xrps by the end of 2021. Slowly, it is getting there as we are now at 41B distributed. Not a ponzi scheme at all given all the value that xrp provides.
  14. Could be the settlement with R3. R3 sued for 5B and maybe got 2B or so with no transfer of cash to Ripple.
  15. My favorite galgitron blog yet! Great information along with some literal LOL moments.
  16. Ripple news: 200 customers, including bank using xRapid ETC news: double spend attack XRP last 24 hours - up 0.87% ETC last 24 hours - up 1.89%
  17. I thought Earthport was creating its own payments platform which amounted to a move away from Ripple? From another thread by @panmores Got a clarification from Tim Masih, head of PR at Earthport: "I can confirm that our ACH is our own offering and not in collaboration with Ripple. We operate our own global banking network. This video is the easiest way to understand it: https://vimeo.com/144494561"
  18. With respect, I do not take BG's comments in this way. BG has been repeatedly making this statement simply to bolster the point that XRP is not a security.
  19. Wow, I couldn't help but laugh when I saw that. $10k, that's it??? How embarrassing for Coinbase, which like you said is supposed to be worth over $1B. Wonder who came up with that figure over at CB? It's one thing to just give $10k and say virtually nothing about it, but to dedicate 1 of these 12 days to it, and think it's a big deal!!! It would be like one of us posting that we gave $5 to the Salvation Army at our last grocery store visit. Horrible.
  20. My understanding (or guess) is that Ripple enters into agreements with FIs, etc to test Xrapid with xrp for a certain time period. Part of the agreement can result in an OTC purchase, but with the right to sell the xrp back to Ripple if the entity for some reason did not want to use it after the trial period. In issuing its distribution figures, Ripple deems the xrp as distributed once the agreement/OTC purchase is entered into. When the entity exercises the right to sell the xrp back to Ripple after the trial period, the distribution figure is lowered. The net distribution figure almost always goes up, but, from what I have seen over the years, it averages going down approximately one week per quarter. Ripple does not update the distribution every week from what I can tell. Instead, it updates the weekly totals every month or so (sometimes more often, sometimes less often). It looks like the total distribution figure cleared 41B for a couple of weeks, but went just south of that figure - to 40.9B - in the last week.
  21. https://data.ripple.com/v2/network/xrp_distribution You can see the dates and distributions over time, the most recent being at the bottom.
  22. Right, the fact that R3 is probably a big holder of xrp as a result of its settlement with Ripple had nothing to do with it!! But we'll take it anyway.
  23. Great letter - seems very pro-digital assets with an obvious concern that if the SEC applies a large umbrella to which digital assets are securities then this promising business and technology will simply move outside the US. I feel Ripple's influence all over this letter.
  24. I guess we all have different interpretations regarding the strength of R3's case. I read the pleadings and it didn't seem like Ripple had much of an argument that R3 breached the agreement. There was a contract between them, and Ripple had the burden to show that the contract was breached. It seemed like Brad simply emailed R3 and said the contract is over. If there wasn't a lot of other emails or other communications regarding R3's lack of follow through on the contract, then Ripple's defense seemed pretty weak IMO. But we never got to see those other communications, if any. In any event, the case is over. I always felt that giving up a fairly big amount of XRP wouldn't be that detrimental to Ripple as one of the big complaints about XRP is that Ripple owns well over half of all the XRP. Transferring a large number of XRP to R3, with strict selling conditions similar to the one Jed has, would get Ripple under the psychological 50B figure more quickly. Yes, it might cost Ripple to lose out on this amount of XRP, but in the long run it might help, and one thing we can agree on is that Ripple is definitely playing the long game.
×
×
  • Create New...