Jump to content

ADingoAteMyXRP

Bronze Member
  • Content Count

    732
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About ADingoAteMyXRP

  • Rank
    Advanced

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thanks for the thoughtful response. When you mention add-on Coil packages for Netflix/Hulu etc, that’s not what I have in mind. I’m talking about ILP getting in the middle between Visa and Netflix as a means of intermediating those monthly payments, in order to get companies like that connected to the IoV. Until that begins to happen, IoV is in limbo. Streaming web monetization is a great idea, but it will necessarily be a fraction of the way we pay in the future since breakage and one-off payments still (and will always) play an important role in high-quality content creation. There’s a reason current Coil content is lower-value, and it’s that the payouts are lower value. This may seem like a chicken-egg problem, but it is not. It is a problem of Coil’s business model. The problem is, Coil has limited the flexibility of ILP by forcing streaming payments and ignoring the one-off and high-value markets, in order to create an experience they want. Not the one that consumers want. Here’s the relationship to xCurrent. Ripple solved a problem for banks by creating better connectivity between ledgers, with the future goal of getting banks to use XRP. I believe Coil is better off focusing on something similar — getting the small and large players who are already making payments online to connect to ILP for their existing transactions. If that sounds like an intractable problem, it’s because at the moment it is. Eventually, Coil or a company more suited to solving that will have to identify a business with a problem that can be solved by ILP payment routing. The more the network grows, the more you can start thinking about how, or if, XRP can make that network more efficient for participants. But until we have an IoV we can’t have IoV+XRP.
  2. Partnering with CC and Mozilla on this is no doubt a great move. But I still scratch my head at the strategy for these payouts. Is Coil trying to grow the ecosystem of payment connectors? The network of content creators? Content consumers? All 3 at once? An open system like ILP is designed to eat away at walled gardens, but a pure focus on open-licenses and indie players is severely limiting. There's a reason most content is produced by larger companies like Netflix -- they've created business models, own IP and can afford to invest billions in content every year. If there were a way to ILP-ize the payment activity of larger ecosystems -- setting aside streaming payments as an eventual secondary goal down-the-line -- it would create big connections for other players like PayPal or Amex to plug into, and more importantly, an incentive for those players to invest in ILP-izing their gateways. I know you can't start this revolution by routing all Netflix subscriptions into XRP, but this feels like a scenario where bottom-up (starting with streaming payments) is introducing too much 'new' into an ecosystem that needs a foundation. Basically, my hot take is that ILP needs an xCurrent. They need to optimize the existing network of payment types by connecting those channels, payment gateways and corporate accounts via ILP intermediaries (without XRP) before they can start doing the fancy stuff. Streaming payments are their xRapid -- an inevitable future goal, but too much of a bet for heavyweights right now. $100M for open source software is a nice start but maybe not the best one.
  3. I think you misspelled “explanation.”
  4. Totally agreed. The thing about any RTP scheme that settles in central bank funds, is that those funds are effectively playing the same role as a nostro account in global remittance. They’re held funds that can’t be invested because they’re trapped by a central entity. This allows instant payment at the expense of efficiency. In the long term, it’s inevitable that these entities will use digital assets as a bridge and allow market makers to compete for those payment paths. I think the Fed knows this and is (hopefully) trying to future proof their solution so that it can accommodate that future state. So no XRP yet, but their planning bodes well for DA holders.
  5. No direct confirmation, but in May of this year Ripple was given one of 3 at-large-member positions on the Faster Payments Council (https://www.paymentsjournal.com/u-s-faster-payments-council-elected-board/), shortly before the FedNow announcement. There's no guarantee they're using the ledger, but Ripple seems to be offering guidance, and FedNow is also supposed to interoperate with blockchain and remittances. (Can't find that article now, but it was a business journal and not a crypto blog).
  6. It's almost certainly a Ripple-led system, designed to interoperate with remittances and digital assets, but there would be no need to use XRP internally within the US. If you want to transfer from a chase account to a BoA account, both of those banks have balances at the Fed so the Fed can be the middleman in that transfer.
  7. To be clear... you're looking for a source from me that a conspiracy spread exclusively in the crypto community and exclusively by Zero Hedge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge) -- a site run by a money-laundering Bulgarian who stole $780M in insider trading and subsequently had his license revoked, only to then start a suspiciously Pro-Russian / pro-alt-right "finance" site pushing the same rhetoric as Russian propaganda... you want a source from me that proves beyond a shred of doubt that this is not a website you should trust? You need to think more critically about the media you consume.
  8. Global Collapse is a propaganda campaign getting pushed by Russian intel through sites like Zero Hedge that have gained a foothold in the crypto community. They’re trying to push down market sentiment. We’re likely to see a recession and they’d rather it be worse in the US so they went after low tier investors with this.
  9. This is a great think piece. I'm sure Ripple staff have had these conversations before, whether or not they pursue going public. My only concern with an IPO (and it's a big one) is that public investors wouldn't have the same vision for the company. If you're trying to maximize stock price in the short term, it could lead to huge longterm failures of imagination. Right now Ripple have the right people in charge making the right decisions. Going public feels like it risks that major strategic advantage, and could perhaps bungle the IoV by putting it in the hands of (pardon me) normies. There's a reason why many crypto investors don't see the longterm potential of something like XRP -- and why most investors think crypto is a scam. It questions too many premises in global finance, and requires stretching the imagination a bit.
  10. Sort of... but it's not a race between ILP and XRP. ILP is simply a method to internetwork between different ledgers. It's like an internet for payments. In an ILP future, if you're trying to make a payment, the network will pick the most efficient path available for that value flow depending on what value you have and the type of asset the recipient is requesting. In the future, if XRP is the global bridge asset, it will often be XRP. But if you're paying USD to someone else who wants USD, or paying USD to EUR (a highly liquid corridor already), then there may be a cheaper way to facilitate that payment across bank connectors without XRP. The idea behind ILP is that there will be many winners in the space. XRP will be best-positioned to take a large share of global ILP payments though, not just because it's a bridge asset, but due to its speed, throughput, and instant global reach. Governments will also be competing with CBDCs but it's left to be seen if they'll allow overseas transactions with digital fiat.
  11. I personally feel you are not personally attacking him. Just my personal opinion.
  12. You included a period when XRP was still at the Q2 rate. The decision to reduce programmatic sales occurred closer to August than July. Also, the inflation rates are measured in percentages specifically to allow us to compare them directly -- market cap has nothing to do with it. I believe you're making a bad faith argument about that. The fact remains, even if we had correct numbers in front of us, the (incorrect) inflation rates we're talking about differ by 0.25%. This is for all intents and purposes not going to be measurable in the real world. The most important drivers of market price will be utility, demand, and retail sentiment.
×
×
  • Create New...