Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by WorldXRP

  1. I took it as Galgitron meaning centralisation of XRP by banks/stakeholders hoarding XRP, thus potentially having a high ownership percentage (therefore being able to affect the market). Ripples ability to distribute XRP to the open market can then dampen this type of centralisation. Thats not my view on what is or will happen, only what I interpreted from the quote...
  2. There was a thread on this in Sep 2017: J-Coin potential impact By Hynzie, September 27, 2017 (not sure how to link other threads properly). What makes you think they are tied together?
  3. This game is just getting started. Bittrex with xRapid to/from Mexico and the Phillipines? USD pairing to XRP in the US? Number 1 in the blink of an eye....no....two blinks.
  4. It’s also widely available outside of America.
  5. Handy links for the ILP > Website: https://interledger.org/ > Documentation: https://interledger.org/overview.html > Tutorials: https://medium.com/interledger-blog > Protocol Specs: https://github.com/interledger/rfcs > Discussion: https://gitter.im/interledger/
  6. They have some great ILP links at the bottom of that meetup page for anyone wanting to read up. > Website: https://interledger.org/ > Documentation: https://interledger.org/overview.html > Tutorials: https://medium.com/interledger-blog > Protocol Specs: https://github.com/interledger/rfcs > Discussion: https://gitter.im/interledger/ We are looking for individuals with experience in web development who know JavaScript/HTML/CSS on the frontend and Node.js on the backend.
  7. Not a lot of information around on Coil yet, this meetup for those in CA, could be great for learning about web monetisation and the ILP. https://www.meetup.com/en-AU/Berkeley-Bitcoin-Meetup/events/253695048/ Stefan Thomas and Ben Sharafian as speakers.
  8. A poorly written/researched article, full of misused quotes, blatant lies mixed in with a touch of truth to make it seem feasible. Hallmarks of a biased , dare I use the word, journalist? @ripplewaytogo where is the proof to back up your statement on BG pushing dates back to Q3 2019. Or was it just a fun random thing to type to get a bunch of responses.
  9. Thanks @KarmaCoverage The thread and article were a good source on the ILP, but did leave me with some confusion on whether xRapid utilises it or not. I don’t believe IOUs can/will be used with xRapid either and had never considered off ledger payment channels as a last leg which I need to look into. Is it a definite that xRapid will use the ILP though? I have only ever hear mention of it using the XRPL.
  10. I’m a bit cloudy on this part...but isn’t what your describing more what the XRPL can be used for, not necessarily what Ripples intent with xRapid is? I remember @Graine going on about how xRapid can use other assets etc, but that the corresponding argument was that Ripple have only ever discussed fiat/XRP to XRP/fiat even though other options are built in.
  11. You’re missing the part where xrp is purchased with fiat at the start then sold back to fiat i.e USD/XRP/MXN. That will be seen on the exchanges and will be a driver of value.
  12. Why do Ripple owe us anything they are a private company who already give out more information than most. The pilots should be kept confidential until they are done, and even then I doubt we will know many of the numbers. My bet is aside from a few small companies that say they are going to use xRapid to the masses to get more customers on, most will just switch over with little fanfare. We will know when it occurs by doing our own research and keeping an eye on the XRPL. http://wipple.devnull.network/ is a great start.
  13. Very significant in terms of appeasing people who use the percentages of Ripple validators on the list as evidence of centralisation. Another to do ticked off just as Ripple said they would do.
  14. @Arcanson I vaguely remember that thread on DS, and believe it was all conjecture..no facts (i'll try and find it (if he did sell some, good on him for seeing it was a speculative rise)). As of now, unless @ripplewaytogo or someone else can find that article and it's not some unsubstantiated sludgefeed piece, then there's been no change. We know WU dissed it, we know there are banks against it, but we also know banks are championing it (SBI, standard etc). The current negative articles are mostly fear mongering, I've not yet read one article that is a true factual kick in the guts for XRP or Ripple. BG and Ripple are doing the right thing by staying silent.
  15. @peanut56 Out of your two scenarios, I would go with the latter. Essentially the same as Trickery is thinking (suppression of market), but from a view of suppression for accumulation. If it were true, I think it would be not only holders of XRP, but of BTC also and they are suppressing as a mean of changing over from one coin with a potentially limited future to one with a higher likelihood of success and financial gain; 0.30c to $3.00 much more feasible than $6,000 to $60,000. What do I think personally.....absolutely no idea. Perhaps large individual holders of XRP are continuing to manipulate and trade the market for massive gains before real adoption. Perhaps Bitcoin maximalists are attempting to crush the price and therefore sentiment followed by reduction in liquidity. Perhaps it's a mix of those two and more. I'm certainly not sure enough to risk my own investment in short-term trading.
  16. Not a far fetched idea. Plenty of early investors around whose personal wealth is tied to the success of their original investments. If you're in an unregulated market, you see the promise of another asset usurping yours, and you have the means to do something...why not.
  17. Bitcoin, Ethereum and Litecoin are still the most traded direct with fiat on Sistemkoin. I would be interested to know what these three markets did in terms of ranking at the same time, to derive any conclusion specific to XRP. I.e. if they did not change dramatically and XRP did, then yes potentially significant.
  18. True, we don't know who they are, but from purely looking at this threads point of naming convention of XRP, I don't see that matters. XRP the asset was created prior to Ripple Labs, prior to XRP II LLC. Also the apparent SEC qualms from the viewpoint of public perception has largely been the name association with utilising the Ripple logo and name creating confusion between company and digital asset; which have all been dealt with in my view. In regards to Class A and B members what are you referring to? on the link you provided I don't see them referenced. If you are meaning the Series A and B shares in Ripple Labs, then the big investors do. I.e. Standard Chartered and the like.
  19. @TheXRPer XRP II, LLC while a subsidiary, is still a separate legal entity. Other institutions/companies, websites etc. can also incorporate XRP in their name if they wish without XRP itself needing to undergo a name change due to association I.e. arringtonxrpcapital.com
  20. last year around Aug-Sept, people claimed XRP was done, that it was called the 300 KRW coin and would never get any higher. It barely moved from 19-20c AUD for months, then out of the blue, massive volume, huge price increases and we are still more than double that value. We’re human, history always repeats unless something fundamental changes and I’m feeling like we will see a rise again soon (months to be conservative); crypto in its current unregulated form is a great money making playground for whales, they don’t want to squash it completely, it would be pointless. In the long run they want the ecosystem to thrive not die. The day we start getting increased regulation on exchanges or noticing a steady increase in payments on the XRPL is the day we may be able to say goodbye to the down/up manipulation and the rinse/repeat cycles, until then HODL.
  21. This market/ecosystem is not a mature forest. Cryptocurrencies/Digital assets are like a forest of saplings, competing with each other for light and highly susceptible to external factors. Once the more competitive saplings (XRP and others) begin to mature and grow deep roots (use cases) the ecosystem will explode. Until then we are at the mercy of speculation/manipulation and the current price whether it is .30c or $3.00 does not represent the intrinsic value that is being worked towards. This current state is separating the wheat from the chaff.
  22. The idea itself is not far fetched, but the current articles and even Emi's retweet are baseless. Articles on peoples wishes (and Weiss tweets) only serve to let the community down if the outcome is that a company (Binance) need to come out and say they are not adding it at this stage. It's a similar vein to coinbase; the community tweets and tweets that coinbase should add XRP, websites start writing articles on it, something get's taken out of context or made up and the tweeting morphs into they will add XRP - everyone gets hyped. Then CB come out and say they are not adding it, and it's seen as a negative and the price drops. Anyone can comment and wish for what they want. But people who write articles should have some standard of checking potential fact from current fiction. As to the question by @yxxyun, if they make a statement in the negative it could either do nothing, or be perfect fodder for big players to push the price down a little lower.
  23. If the securities thing is still an issue (behind closed doors, I don't think it is) name association is not going to a part of it. XRP has already undergone a dissociation from Ripple the company and it's been effective. We now have XRP as XRP and drops as a sub-unit; another change would not be for the better.
  • Create New...