Jump to content

wogojump

Member
  • Posts

    247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wogojump

  1. Yes, would be very unlikely that at least a few large players with this information did not sell ahead of time. I believe SEC employees may still be able to still buy and hold certain crypto, as these surprise lawsuits are filed against crypto companies. Which is a huge conflict of interest and unfair advantage for for them.
  2. Like others have said, the Ripple's legal team has ex SEC employees. So they already know the types of internal communications that were sent out (for the time period they worked at the SEC). There is a time period where additional communications have been sent out since them leaving their SEC roles. But still, these communications were sent to numerous employees internally at the SEC. Even if they wanted to try and hide one of these communications, all it would take is one whistle blower internally at the SEC to say they saw that type of documentation (that wasn't shared in this case). This would most likely result in jail time for those who tried burying the documents. As well as many other significant negative implications for the SEC.
  3. This is also a week after Ripple won the decision by the judge for them to read through all the SEC's formal internal communications tied to this case (memos, meeting notes, etc.): https://www.coindesk.com/sec-ripple-discovery-bitcoin-ether. We all knew SEC was contradicting itself up to this point. Then Tetragon was ordered to reimburse Ripple's legal fees based on this decision within the last week: https://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/news/tetragon-lost-case-to-reclaim-175-million-ripple-investment/. I am sure Berger knows he wants to have a job somewhere else, once Ripple's legal team shares their findings on the SEC internal communications.
  4. First Clayton and now Berger. Who still supports this case? Everyday there are more people that are against this case and the few supporters are dropping like flies.
  5. In general its good advice. But its poor timing and execution by David. Tweeting this at the middle of the night, during SEC lawsuit, while XRP hits all time high within last 3 years, and having access to insider trading information; is not a good approach. Everyone should consider selling at least some of their XRP during the height of this bull run. But, the way David is communicating this recommendation, could cause him more problems than actually helping investors.
  6. In the past crypto bull markets, XRP has typically trailed at at end of the cycle. XRP and other cryptocurrencies typically drastically increase in value for the ~6 month bull run period, then significantly decline after. I do agree Jed running out of XRP is bullish and helps remove a significant ongoing sell factor for XRP. But, I am anticipating the hype for Jed running out of sales and price of XRP being traded at this future time, will be over hyped/valued. I am expecting a significant correction may be due shortly after this event. Every cryptocurrency bull run so far, has had a significant crash after the bull market ends. I will still consider buying back in after this bull market ends, based on positive factors like selling pressure being reduced. One factor to consider as well, is Ripple and their executive's ability to still mass sell XRP after the SEC lawsuit is finished. At this time, it appears they will most likely still be able to continue selling XRP (which eventually is bought back by retail investors). There are no guarantees how much and what strategies they will continue to use for selling XRP.
  7. Jed finally running out of of XRP has been a huge anticipation for many people over the last few years, including myself. I plan on using this as one of my personal triggers for selling my XRP holdings, when Jed's holdings fully deplete. Which could come very soon if XRP continues to blow up in this bull market.
  8. Lol, that backfired a bit. In reality though, if Ripple keeps destroying lawsuits like this with the SEC case. The $3.4 million fee Tetragon had to pay back to Ripple on this case, will be negligible compared to Tetragon's profit they will eventually make by having to hold onto their original $175 million investment in Ripple's series C stock.
  9. I had to look up specific examples, to get a better idea. Internal staff to staff emails on not shareable, but any thing more formal like minutes and memos are shareable. https://forkast.news/xrp-ripple-wins-access-sec-documents-bitcoin-ether/ This isn't quite as bad for SEC, but I would still bet they messed up somewhere on these.
  10. This case keeps getting better and better. There has been many yellow flags so far, based on how unorthodox the SEC filed this case and unprepared they were. It will be entertaining to see what internal communications the SEC has on this topic. All it will take is one mess up on a SEC's side on their internal communications, for it to be game over. Based on how the SEC has been struggling and contradicting on publicly shared communications, I can only imagine how bad their internal communications are.
  11. I do expect the bull run to end sooner, than later. The bull runs have always been tied to BTC price movement. I believe all bull runs cycles in the past have lasted for around~6 months (from time prices really start ramping up to the date that all time high is hit). BTC prices started ramping up in November of 2020. This bull run could definitely go longer than the the historical average, but odds become less and less as this duration extends. I can't really accurately expect at this time if prices will ever drop below .90USD. This is too largely dependent on factors that are unknown to us at this time: Does XRP hit all time high again part of this bull run and best case scenarios occur this year? - we may never see prices get much lower than .90USD. Does XRP miss this bull run from SEC lawsuit and/or not all best case scenarios occur this year? -we probably will see prices dip below .90USD.
  12. There are good chances XRP price will go over 1.28AUD in the next few months based on factors like: Jed's sales coming to end soon. All crypto currently in bull run- XRP was one of the most suppressed cryptos up to this point when looking at value vs. trading price. There are multiple scenarios Where SEC settlement could come to a end this year, pushing up XRP price. XRP historically has been a late bloomer on the last bull runs. XRP has not yet hit its all time high (like most other major cryptos already hit and passed during this bull run). Even though I am expecting the above, I would personally not throw in any of my money at $1.28AUD+ during this bull run. I am going to wait for this bull run to complete its course, then see if I want to buy back in a year or 2, once prices crash a bit.
  13. One of the key factors that will impact the price of any asset or investment is business institutional interest in holding the asset/investment. Specific examples of this can be debated on level of impact and how to trigger enough interest for institutions to buy the asset. A few examples: Bitcoin: Exchanges- Holding large values of BTC, so they can support buying/selling on their exchange. This requires more BTC to be bought and held as interest in exchanges increase for this use case that they can profit off. Organizations like Tesla buying BTC - Appears Elon did this for plans to both accept BTC as payment and speculative interest based on expecting BTC prices will increase in the future. Grayscale and ARK funds have been investing in BTC. Stocks: Mutual funds and indexes- These types of institutions purchase company stocks based on factors like dividend history and speculated return on investments. Real Estate: Institutions commonly purchase and develop lands lots for residential, commercial, industrial, etc. So they can proceed forward with generating ROI. The cryptocurrencies that continue to increase the most in value in the future, will also have correlation with the most institutions buying and holding the asset for some type of use case. Likewise with XRP in the past few years, selling XRP back to retail investors and suppressing the price has opposite impact on driving future institutional interest.
  14. This is an area the XRPL foundation needs to improve on, to make it easier and more accessible for stakeholders like yourself to get involved on. At this time I would recommend: Participate in the Github XRPL discussions posts, including: https://github.com/XRPLF/XRPL-Standards/discussions/30 (as noted above) Follow and watch this streamer channel on twitch.tv- They will be discussing all types of technical concepts, including NFTs: The currently available functionality on the XRPL for NFTs is far from being ready for individual developers to mass integrate applications into. In order for mass adoption and real uses cases to built on XRPL. This will require stakeholders like yourself to both understand the current functionality and make proposals for implementing key functionality on the XRPL, that will be required for real uses cases and mass adoption.
  15. I haven't read through the white papers, but I am sure David Schwartz has spent plenty of time analyzing the consensus framework like noted above. In latest RippleXDev twitch.tv stream he also mentioned his opinions when to implement functionality into the existing ledger blockchain code base vs. forking to a new system. Basically, he summarized any types of changes can be made to the existing XRPL software code (which is safe to say includes potential proposals like above). It just comes down to proposing value adding changes that the governance structure agrees to implement. He does agree there are needs in certain scenarios to fork systems. One of the negatives of choosing to fork, is forcing end users to choose to utilize one or the other blockchain system going forward. He believes much like the US dollar, value is increased when all users are using one system.
  16. A method like this could very well be pursued. What is throwing people off is nikb's comment below. I would consider the above strategy to require some type of forking, which was noted is not being pursued: If this above is true, then it seems like Ripple's private version of XRPL would have to be part of the code base for the open-source XRP ledger https://ripple.com/insights/ripple-pilots-a-private-ledger-for-central-banks-launching-cbdcs/: Only way I could see this logically working, is Ripple is planning to work with the XRP Ledger foundation group to develop and make amendments for allowing private instances of the ledger to be created and managed within the public open-source XRPL code. But, I'm sure I am misunderstanding plans somewhere on this.
  17. This is something I am interested in knowing more details as well. Based on how XRPL is currently configured, my initial assumption was this would require a hard code fork. But this looks to not be the planned direction based on a comment from nikb. Based on my understanding of the current XRPL, I am assuming the XRPL presently cannot support real use case functionality for Ripple to have private ledger for CBDC's that integrate with XRP (without additional development work). Additional functionality and enhancements could easily be coordinated between the XRPL foundation and Ripple developers to accomplish this. Which the technical changes would obviously be dependent on the desired business direction by Ripple. @Wietse @JoelKatz- If either of you are able share technical capabilities at this time on how this could potentially be accomplished during the next twitch dev discussion, that could be a topic of interest for the community:
  18. I like referencing to De Beers since they are involved with many of the situations Ripple and XRP run into. De Beers is already utilizing similar technology to track their physical diamonds: https://www.debeersgroup.com/sustainability-and-ethics/leading-ethical-practices-across-the-industry/tracr. Tracr even uses the same slogan "Internet of Value" One of the biggest factors when trying to sell collectable type of assets, is ability to prove the asset is an original (and not counterfeit). When you go to appraisals, auctions, thrift shops, diamonds stores, etc.; the first thing potential buyers to do is examine if they are original or counterfeit. That is a key factor determining the real value of the asset. Currently depending on the asset; a person may resort to "proving" the asset is not counterfeit based on explaining how they acquired the product, screenshots, letters, financial transaction documents, and allowing buyer to examine the asset. If NFTs were implemented correctly and actually utilized, this could give everyone the ability to quickly examine if the asset is a an original and has value (based on reviewing the NFT history on the ledger).
  19. Much like Ripple is actively planning contingency plans in best interest of their company (and share holders), this community should be doing the same. Ripple's end game was always to move to profit generating software services (and transition away from profits from selling limited supply of XRP). Everyone who has worked in the Finance industry knows mass scale adoption of blockchains for banks would require private ledgers. Ripple's timing and strategy is based on what is in best interest for them at the present time. Below are a few theoretical outcomes that Ripple is planning contingency plans around: 1. Ripple is allowed to continue selling XRP and profiting of this asset after the SEC case is resolved- Ripple will most likely try to integrate native XRP as one of the key assets utilized on their private ledger. They would still integrate and support other currencies where value is added. They would do this so they can achieve their long term goals of generating profit from software services on mass scale with banks. As well as bump up value of XRP to increase profits when they sell XRP in the future. 2.Ripple is not allowed to continue selling XRP and profiting of this after the SEC case is resolved- They will have already set themselves up to easily rely on selling software services, that are not reliant on XRP. They can stop supporting XRP growth, easily transfer to support any other currency on their private ledger. As well as easily integrate with other fiat, stable coins, etc. This community should be planning contingency plans in best interest of the whole community, just like how Ripple is doing for themselves. If Ripple commits to expanding growth for the native XRP asset in the future, then great. If they don't, then that is fine if community planned long term growth options without them.
  20. I was able to review over your post in more depth as well as other areas on the GitHub site. Forking discussion is irrelevant to your topic on Github, which it actually looks like you are one of the more active and influential developers defining future development of the XRP Ledger. These were great recommendations that you pushed for last week: https://github.com/XRPLF/XRPL-Standards/discussions/17 Hopefully the developers and others in the community continue to leverage the development framework you outlined above. Ability for the development process to receive ideas, prioritize, and deploy functionality. As well as coordinate development standards for integrating with 3rd party systems, will be key factors defining which public and private blockchain systems are the top players in next 5-10 years. It will be beneficial to continue streamlining legit value adding ideas from the community to be vetted out in the GitHub Ideas section. One other area that may be beneficial in the future for developers, users, testers, etc. to be on the same page when discussing proposals; is to flag which logical area(s) of the system are being proposed to be changed. For example, when I worked on software releases for financial systems we would flag proposed changes based on a pre-defined list: Type of payment (ACH, Wire, ICL), OFAC, reports, messages, etc. This made it easier for team members to quickly understand what was in scope vs. out of scope for the proposed change.
  21. This is what I have been looking to better understand. I believe by default no. At least based on current laws and with out additional legal/lawsuits being applied. If Ripple started going out of their way to move their funds through the FXRP mint process, I am sure the SEC would then monitor them for potentially violating investment contract laws.
  22. I see now, I need to review over the proposal and comments closer. If I am understanding correctly, Wietse proposal is on XRP ledger (layer 2?) which may be approved by the the community. If any additional advanced changes on XRP ledger (layer 1?) are proposed, this would would need further consensus from the community and could be rejected.
  23. There seems to be a disconnect on terminology being used, causing part of the confusion. When I mentioned "fork" in this thread, I was intending to use the general software term for forking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_(software_development). I was not intending to use the blockchain specific term for forking: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hard-fork.asp. Going forward in this thread, I will be referring to the "fork (software development)" terminology. Fork (software development) can be done on any type of code that is shared and worked on by multiple developers; like cryptocurrency blockchains, cryptocurrency tokens, cryptocurrency wallets, websites, databases, etc. The XRP ledger and XRP native asset are two different code development areas. Using the "fork (software development)" terminology, here are options I see when ever looking to add additional use case and functionality to cryptocurrency: Can the use case/functionality be supported by the existing XRP native asset/token on the existing XRP ledger? Yes- Then use the existing XRP native asset/token on the existing XRP ledger. No: Can the existing XRP native asset/token be modified to satisfy use case/functionality? Yes- Then development community agrees to modify and support future code line for existing XRP native asset/token. No: Can a new or fork (software development) for asset/token be made to satisfy to use case/functionality? Yes- Then development community agrees to modify and support future code line for new asset/token. No: Can a modification on the existing XRP ledger be made to satisfy use case/functionality? Yes- Then development community agrees to modify and support future code line for XRP ledger. No- Then developer looks to create asset/token on a new or fork (software development) blockchain ledger to support the use case/functionality. The above scenario starts from the easiest and most practical option, then moves down towards the most extreme and resource intensive options. Goal is to try and find solution via an option on the top to satisfy the use case/functionality, but there is and will always be needs for more extreme and resource intensive options lower down on the list. If you read through this discustion: https://github.com/XRPLF/XRPL-Standards/discussions/30, Wietse is specifically proposing a fork (software development) option for a new token as highlighted in green step above ^. He is specifically defining this proposal to utilize the existing XRP ledger functionality and not rely on red step ^ above. If you read through other developer comments, you will see additional use case/functionality being requested that is actually dependent on red step above ^. Fork (software development) on the XRP ledger is very extreme and should be a last resort option. It is more practical if developers can agree to upgrade existing XRP ledger functionality to satisfy use case/functionality. Fork (software development) on the asset/token side is even more practical and less extreme. Options like this if coordinated well, can literally expand uses cases and avoid community being impacted by lawsuits like with Ripple vs. SEC case impacting the XRP native asset/token.
  24. Wietse and David are actively vetting out options for additional tokens to be used on the XRP ledger: https://github.com/XRPLF/XRPL-Standards/discussions/30. Forking vs. creating a new token may technically be accomplished differently, but in the end are practically the same. It looks like the proposed token above would utilize the XRP ledger, but be non fungible (as compared to XRP being fungible). This doesn't include all of my wishlist items in a token, but could provide opportunities for having tokens that are unique.
  25. The Sec claiming Ripple executives intentionally failed to follow legal advice was not thought out thoroughly by the SEC legal team when originally filing the case. Within the last month, the SEC legal team had to make amendments to try and strengthen this claim. It appears the SEC legal team didn't realize they needed stronger points to prove intent (which is required when they listed Chris and Brian as individuals on the lawsuit). I believe they were informed by the judge they are going to need stronger points, which resulted in them making the recent amendments. Then we come to acknowledgment this week on these communications coming from the SEC, which makes this claim even less valid. I am still betting a settlement will be made between Ripple organization and SEC for violating investment contract, but specific claims against Chris and Brad intentionally not following SEC law will be dropped.
×
×
  • 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.