Jerrybo

Thanks for sharing, very interesting to read such opinions. I think a comparison with gold is difficult at this time. Gold is old and well established. Cryptocurrencies have to prove themselves as better alternatives for real problems for at least several decades. Several decades are a long time in IT. In my opinion, it depends a lot from your personal point of view: - If you're comparing gold with bitcoin there are advantages. It’s faster and cheaper to transport. - If you're comparing gold with any crypto, you discover other aspects and solutions. I don't think it has to do with intelligence primary. It's more about how you rate bitcoins dominance and inviolability. I understand a maxi’s point of view if I'm assuming bitcoin will simply dominate crypto space forever. Another reason could be, people tend to simplify unconsciously unknown things. No one can have a detailed knowledge of so many cryptos. I'm observing similar behavior in traditional media. For many people cryptos are bitcoin. Therefore, people don't know the unknown. It's standard human behavior. We all do that. As mentioned before, bitcoin is successfully in some aspects. People assume something is the best because of it's success. Time will tell.

Thanks for your feedback. The usecase is blockchain agnostic. An implementation could also use other cryptos like Nano. Important are tiny/free fees for transactions and speed. I used XRPL for convenience Totally agree @Sukrim, this usecase is some kind of an abuse of a payment system for a messaging system. I like trying out new usecases that do not always fit what it’s meant for. It does not care about amounts or settlement. It just uses its messaging feature. I also think, relying on ledger access is a main critic point. It shifts maintenance cost from myself to the entity that provides ledger access. Despite that, I see following main advantages: It's a kind of outsourcing infrastructure. I prefer paying someone for ledger access, rather than caring about a more complex backend infrastructure myself with maintenance. Backend can be a simple PHP script (simple POST REST API). Hosting a PHP script is very simple, doesn’t need much server maintenance and often available almost (or complety) for free. On the other hand, with direct WebSockets we need something like a Node.js on the server side. That comes with a lot more "admin work" than hosting a PHP script. Another critic would be “why not pay someone to use a generic push notification service, instead of building something yourself”. I appreciated your critical feedback, thanks again

As a mobile developer maybe you needed to send your user a notification from your server backend to his smartphone. Therefore you probably used Google Cloud Messaging (GCM) and/or Apple Push Notification Service (APNS). While it’s easy to send notifications to user’s smartphone, it’s getting harder if you like to send a notification from user’s smartphone to his computer. Existing services have limited functionality for that use case or don’t support all desired computer platforms. Therefore we created radCM as a new approach using XRPL. It's the first paragraph of this Coil post. What do you think about that approach?

Disussions start at https://github.com/XRPLF/XRPL-Standards

Thanks for your response. From time to time, I'm in contact with Wietse but i prefer to not contact people directly if not really necessary/not directly related to their products. I assume people have enough other stuff to do. IMO this topic should be more in the activity area of XRPLF.

Meanwhile I discovered proposals BIP-0021 (Bitcoin) and EIP-681 (Ethereum). I couldn’t find an equivalent proposal for XRPL. Any suggestions where to submit & discuss such proposals? Didn’t receive a twitter response from @XRPLF until now. @karlos Maybe you could move this topic to "Technical Discussion" due there isn't a blockchain agnostic solution and therefore we need to create an XRPL specific proposal.

Hi there I'm currently working on a converter, which transforms blockchain payments (xrp) into ISO20022 camt054 format. That should allow companies to import received crypto payments into their accounting system within the existing ISO20022 import functionality. In traditional accounting, you need to match a received payment with an issued bill to recognize which bill was payed. Therefore you can integrate an identification string into your bill as payload. If this payload also gets integrated into the payment, the receiver can match the payment to the bill. Most crypto wallets just seem to scan qr-codes which just contain receiver's wallet address without such an identification string. Therefore, the described matching isn't possible on receiver’s side. Does anyone know of a (living or currently developed) standard, which includes such a payload into payments?

I really like that idea! Some time ago I tried to motivate coil team to support a usecase, where we could implement coil in any software. But I could not convince them I think. In my opinion there are some interesting advantages in such an approach: a) As you already exound it's a way to support other (free) projects b) It enableds a further distribution of XRP c) It could improve one of XRP ecosystem's most disadvatages: lack of independent developers. While BTC, ETH and others have PoW to enable companies and developers to generate regular earnings, theres no such a thing in XRP ecosystem. The possibility of earning money will attract a lot of developers. d) It would enable a complete new and easy way how one (a customer) could pay for software. Unfortunately I haven't discovered a solution for that until now, which is easy enought to get implemented. As a developer I would love to provide software (also in non crypto related projects), which include "pay-per-use" system. For b) and c) Ripple as a big XRP holder is maybe also interessted in such possibilities. I think it worth to think more about such a payment solution.

Sorry, I read some reddit before that post. I invested more time that i liked into that post... therefore it must remain

Ripple tries to enter financial sector. As I read all your post it doesn't seem that many are working in this sector. I would love the hear such voices as I know there are some here. Financial sector works differently. If you don't get that, I think it's even harder to understand several developments. ODL saves a bank money? Nice, but who cares? The big investers as stock owners? Pha, they are far far away. As a private person or a sme company you are interested in saving money. Banks have already a lot of money. There are other, even more important aspects for an ODL interested person in a bank: What can I personally gain/lose? If I push/start that project, it will be attached to my person. It's success/failure will be connected to my personal future in that bank. If it works, nice, I'll get a special bonus. However, if it fails, I'm doomed at that bank and have to leave. Other people in other banks will know of "my" failed project. Compliance is a central aspect to consider in banking. I can’t say that enought times. The risks to take are even bigger for that person, as the situation is not 100% crystal clear. Violating rules are often costly. Not many will risk a 1M+ punishment just for a maybe "tiny" bonus or a "good work man, thanks". The higher you are in a bank, the more it's about keeping status quo to reduce risks. Financial sector is very lazy. They have enough money. They (currently) don't need to hurry. That boils down to the question: Do the possible gains overweight the PERSONAL risks I'll take as a weighted opinion leader in my bank? Well, most of the time the answer in banker's reality is no. A 10k/100k bonus for such a project is nice, but not that much compared to the case the project fails. And just to get that clear: That whole ODL-XRP-Ripple thing isn't a guaranteed success as many seem to believe. There are so many posts about no visible progress , no one uses ODL, etc. No one is going to take the risks if a success is not 99% for sure nor will they publicly talk about it. I don't expect to see any banks soon using it. You will hear about it, if they are 99%+ sure it works for them. Maybe some of you have to rethink about their expectations. And yea, trolls will keep trolling I would enjoy to hear some banker's voice in this topic.

Maybe my words weren't the best chosen. Maybe they were interpreted wrongly. English isn't my native language. In my opinion, there are often multiple aspects to consider if you think about a topic. Depending on the point of view, other aspects maybe appear only after we take another view. As already told, I'm not interested in such a way of talk as I read it. Maybe I get that wrongly. Thanks for sharing your minds in this thread.

@TiffanyHayden sad to hear about personal attacks. We should be able to discuss respectfully about different topics and bring light into multiple aspects. However, yea, that's sadly the culture we're living. One of the major reasons I prefer to stay in background. Very kind you jumped in with your own validator, but what did you expected. Were your expectation maybe too high? As mentioned before, priorities in a competitive area may change quickly. I'm sure Ripple is aware of that specific situation now. Was it just luck that the network didn't halt? Maybe. Maybe there was a disaster plan. We can just speculate, and speculation rarely leads to meaningful results. Over the last several pages you mentioned the almost halt again and again. Important situation of course, but let's continue. Don't get my wrong, it's an important note. However, I prefer to go further instead saying the same over and over again. @TiffanyHayden (second post) I'm unsure if you really wanted to choose that tone how I read it. I'm not interessted in such an offensiv way of talk.

@TiffanyHayden I understand your annoyance, you mentioned some important aspects. However, they aren't new. These aspects existed since I discovered XRPL years ago. Therefore, nothing has changed. I knew that situation when I started investing time into XRPL. I knew Ripple hold many coins. I knew there is no fund that just throws money to me. I knew nobody pays me for running a validator. I have to insist politely, but if you expected something different, your expectations may just have been too optimistic. All your engagement (thanks!) was your personal decision. I for myself think most of the time, only the biggest player in an ecosystem is able to change the ecosystem. I never expected something else for XRPL. @Dogowner5 I support your opinion that Ripple's reputation is on the line with the XRPL. Technically, I agree with Tiffany, but there are soft factors to consider. I think it would be risky to change the coin now. If you work with financial institution sooner or later you understand, that a lot is about trust, stability, regulatory and compliance. I assume financial institution wouldn't appreciate such a move. If you read about early days of Facebook, Google+ and Twitter you discover, that hard competition leads to abrupt direction changes in companies. We are in a hard competition area. I assume, there are/were such situations too at Ripple. I don't assume everything just works easy peasy as planned months and years ago. As a startup, you have to react to unexpected situations quickly and have to be agile. Most important topics have top priority. They may change quite fast after an important meeting with a potential customer. In a shorter-term view, establishing an ecosystem rarely has that top priority. I for myself accept that behavior. I never expected something else. Nobody ever promised me something.

In my opinion it's all about the idea. A horde of apprentices without ideas and visions won't be able to establish an ecosystem. Given a good idea learning XRPL specifics isn't that hard. I think we see the same problem, just with different reasons and other point of views. Thank you for exchanging minds.

I refuse to judge here which projects are worth a funding. In my opinion, this would lead to an ineffective debate of subjective opinions.

I'm convinced EVERY good idea finds a funding. In my eyes, often people tend to think their idea is better than it actually is.

I would argue, they just don't care if anyone else uses XRPL or not. I don't see currently a prosper ecosystem for XRPL nor serious efforts of Ripple to establish one. That's ok for me.

Honestly, I don't think the funding is an issue. There is so much money around in the world as never before. I'm convined that you will get a funding for any idea if it's worth. That's not a question of the platform you use. Never in my career any possible investor told me "but you have to use platform x".

I think we have to be fair here. Neither with Bitcoin nor Ethereum, nor any other serious platform there is an easy funding rain for my ideas. If my idea is it worth, I’m going to find a funding independent of my chosen platform.

Today it doesn't matter. But imo the decision to enable ICOs attracted a lot of devs into the Ethereum ecosystem. There are a lot of independent Ethereum companies able to generate money nowadays. That results in a living ecosystem beside all the moon talk. Imo that supports and encourages innovation. With this point of view, the distribution of coins in an ecosystem matters.

I don't see that as a big issue. XRPL API is quite good documented and not that hard to learn. There isn't any exotic programming language *solidity**cough* I don’t see XRPL just as a playground for interested coders. It’s a platform like others you can use. With any idea I'm going to choose the environment which fits the best. I don't see any big issue here. The lesser incentive there is, the bigger the idealistic motivation must be. The ICO chess move was a great idea.

I wouldn't sign this in this absoluteness ... but the current situation does not seem supportive to me either.

I think each entrepreneur has to decide him/herself, if an idea and the environment is good enough to give it a try. I understand the reason, why there shouldn't be an incentive to run a validator. But there are also negative aspects of that decision. Some were mentioned above. It's ok if someone doesn't want/can contribute. But... no incentive for those who could contribute also means people maybe invest their time and effort in other platforms :/

Great effort, top engagement! Just speaking for myself, I currently have to refuse to take such big risks in this space as you took. Wish you all the best and press thumbs for your success!

As mentioned before, I think it's not an easy task to support developers in a sustainable way. To establish a healthy community of developers/engineers, they should be able to start projects with a good risk/reward aspect. A good aspect in mining is imo that it gives people an incentive to "work" with the network. Money can be made and spent within the network. Once I hoped Codius would became such a place. But currently, the party is running on another floor :/