dazlightyear

Member
  • Content count

    114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

dazlightyear last won the day on September 20 2016

dazlightyear had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About dazlightyear

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Those institutions looking to use the technology will be purchasing directly from Ripple. Price increases will mostly be driven by private investors and traders in the same way as it is for every other cryptocurrencies. As more XRP is sold OTC there is an increasing chance of worldwide Ripple adoption. These sales should inspire confidence, resulting in more speculative purchases from the private investors and traders. As time passes those banks and institutions that have not been onboarded will have to buy on the open market as mentioned by @Duke67
  2. Currently Ripple is selling XRP directly to banks and institutions looking to use the Ripple network. The xrp distributed in this way is subject to lock up agreements so that it cannot be dumped on the market. Compare this to Bitcoin where most newly mined BTC is immediately sold to pay electricity and equipment costs.
  3. Uquid appears to accept a very wide range of cryptocurrencies (not just Ripple). The webpage devoted to Ripple is no doubt just there for SEO purposes. As @zerpdigger mentioned, their website hardly inspires confidence. A quick look at the site suggests you can top up your card using a wide variety on crypto. This is immediately converted to either USD, EUR or GBP. Not much innovation there.
  4. Probably not a popular answer in a Ripple forum but Coinbase have just announced that they are developing an Ethereum debit card: http://tokencard.io/ In the bumf they advise that they are preparing us for 'The Post Bank Era', which is apt considering the discussions going on in a couple of other threads here just at the moment. In fact, section 6.3 of their whitepaper is titled 'Ditching Banks Altogether'. The beauty of this solution is that your ETH (or ERC20 tokens) are held within a smart contract, and so you do not have to trust any institution with your funds (which is the case for Bitcoin debit cards). You can interact with the contract via an Ethereum browser to update your daily/weekly spending limits, to freeze the card etc. Ripple is laser focused on enabling rather than disintermediating banks and so I'm not expecting to see a similar Ripple based solution. Instead bank issued cards will run on Ripple's rails.
  5. Is a deflationary currency like Bitcoin a suitable replacement for fiat on its own? Seems unlikely. It would result in a grossly unfair distribution of wealth which would only get worse as time passes. This is why the 'one coin to rule them all' theory proposed by Vinnie does not hold any weight with me. I would suggest that to understand what a future system might look like you just have to look at what is already happenning in the cryptocurrency space. New coins and tokens are being created every day. Bitcoin dominance is falling as those people who are disappointed with their measly BTC allocations move them into more profitable alternatives. Bitcoin may be deflationary, however the cryptocurrency ecosystem as a whole is not. After the reset, instead of the government printing fiat there will be a healthy inflation resulting from individuals, communities and businesses creating new tokens. Will XRP form part of this ecosystem if the banks collapse? I don't see why not. Those of us in the cryptocurrency space associate Ripple with banks, however it does not need them to exist. That said, it would be considered less relevant in a world without them. Perhaps Ripple will be the saviour of some banks? If digital assets appreciate significantly as a result of the 'reset' the few hundred million XRP they have each secured as part of their onboarding deals may allow them to exist in a different form in the future....
  6. 45% of the founders allocation has been pledged to charity and as far as I am aware 100% of that which remains can only be sold under the terms of the lock up agreement and as such there should be no concern from market makers about sudden dumps of XRP by the founders. I remember RBS publicly stating concerns about how XRP was distributed, however if I recall correctly this was because Ripple (not the founders) owned so much. I think the issue of the founders XRP has been dealt with. If there is a need to provide some kind of assurance to banks and market makers then a well considered lock-up of Ripple's XRP would be the way to go about it. Edit: Does anyone know for certain whether Chris' and Arthurs' XRP is bound by the same lock up agreement as Jed's? I believe that to be the case however I'm not sure that I have read anything official to say so. If it is not then it should be. Jed went rogue and so we should assume that Chris and Arthur could do the same. Edit: RBC changed to RBS.
  7. Not a good analogy though. No one has a problem with the shares in Ripple that the founders own.
  8. Let's not forget that Chris donated 7bn to charity and Jed donated a further 2bn. As such 11% of XRP went to founders and 9% to worthwhile causes. It is just a little galling that Jed decided he needed the majority of his 9bn allocation to fund a fork which gave virtually no credit to all of those people who had helped fund the development of the technology up to the point at which he forked it. In Jed's defence Stellar is a non-profit organisation.
  9. Like quite few others here I also disagree that a fork would be equivalent to theft. After a fork those left on the lesser chain should take a moment to reflect on what they could have done differently to prevent such a situation from occurring. If you design a decentralised system in which a fork is possible you really should understand the possibilities and govern yourself accordingly I wouldn't support a fork because I feel the founders commitment to donate large portions of their initial allocations to charity was very gracious. The lock agreements provide enough security that there won't be any large scale selloffs. That said, if we could go back in time to when Jed began dumping XRP in a clear attempt to crash its price I may have taken up a different position.
  10. Bitgo are building The Royal Mint a blockchain tailored specifically for their needs: https://blog.bitgo.com/building-the-blockchain-for-royal-mint-gold-cecb4ff6f329 https://www.provachain.com
  11. When we see 'ridiculous rumours' and 'myths' it should be easy enough to make a rebuttal. Threads which dispel rumours are useful to newcomers arriving here with preconceived ideas. Discouraging members from making negative posts makes it look like Ripple has something to hide. We shouldn't be merging threads that expose Ripple's warts or commenting on positive threads from weeks ago to push negative threads further from the top of the 'active topics' page. If this forum becomes an echo chamber of positive sentiment it won't just be less useful, it will be boring too. It is because I am so bullish on Ripple and XRP that I welcome open debate.
  12. I think you have it the wrong way around. It is the details which form the terms of the agreement. They override any intentions.
  13. The chart does show a large increase in volume, however this one shows that the vast majority of that happens over at Poloniex: Monica's statement starts by saying: "The same limits are placed on the ability of the charity to sell the XRP as are placed on the Jed's ability to sell his remaining XRP." Which I agree makes it seem that they can sell independently. However it then goes on to say: "for the second and third years of this agreement, Jed and the DAF will be able to collectively sell for each day of the week 0.75 percent of the Average Daily Volume."
  14. This forum has always welcomed open debate. Let's try to keep it that way. If you disagree with the sentiment of a post it is best to offer a counter argument. I agree with @RobertHarpool that sales will probably increase. However because most of the recent volume happened on Poloniex (and currently only RCL volume is used to determine the amount Jed can sell) this may not have a significant impact on price. It is also worth remembering that Jed has always had to split his total sale allowance between himself and his charity. His charity may receive nothing over the next two weeks if he feels that way inclined. Edit: Grammar
  15. I have only taken them once. Unfortunately the dosage dished out by my insomniac friend (3 x 10mg tablets) was far in excess of the recommended dose. I struggled to stay awake for the whole next day! Horses for courses I suppose