Jump to content


Silver Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


BobWay last won the day on March 18

BobWay had the most liked content!

About BobWay

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Software Engineering, Cryptocurrency, Money Systems, Rippling Transactions
  • Occupation
    (Stealth Mode Again)
  • Country
    United States
  • Ripple Address

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Yeah, not totally sure how I feel about that. It turns out that someone had stuck me with what they thought were worthless Snapswap USD in exchange for my Bitstamp USD. That was why I had them in the first place. Only when I was consolidating wallet funds did I notice. But what they did to me, turned out to my benefit. Go figure. My swap went to someone who had deliberately put an offer in the book asking for them. As David said at SxSW. Once an asset like Snapswap USD exists. There is no way for Snapswap to force people to give them back. And as long as people treat them like they are real, then they have value. Some contend that is the same reason USD tether has value. You'd think that something would need to be "redeemable" in order to maintain its value. But as we all know, that turns out not to be a requirement.
  2. I'm releasing this thread even though it is still a work in progress. Contracts are a topic lots of people have asked about, so the book club needs a thread to start the discussion. I'll finish the background as I have time. But feel you have to wait for that in order to ask questions and start the discussion.
  3. Phase 4: ILP "two-phase commit" for money (80% of contracts seemed to implement some form of value "escrow". This was often done in order to synchronize bi-direction (give and receive) business transactions. ILP implements this process natively, doing away with the need for many, many proposed "smart-contracts". Placeholder. Still working on this post
  4. Phase 3: Codius off-chain contracts Placeholder. Still working on this post
  5. Phase 2: Etherium on-chain contracts Placeholder. Still working on this post
  6. Phase 1: Bitcoin on-chain scripts The Bitcoin "Ledger" uses an unconventional accounting model referred to as "Unspent Transaction Outputs" (UTXO). What happens is that every bitcoin transaction consumes one or more "inputs" (hence spending them). And the same transaction generates one or more "outputs". So just to be clear, the inputs to one transaction are outputs from one or more previous transactions. Once you've spent an output, you must be prevented from spending it again. The is bitcoin's famous "double spend problem." Note: Double Spend is bitcoin jargon. Bankers never use that term. In banking the same concept is called, "Over Drawing Your Account." Or even a bit more nastily, "Bouncing a Check." All it really means is you can't spend money you don't have. Now an unspent transaction output is like a little safe of bitcoin tracked inside every bitcoind node. Each safe is locked by a short computer function called a "script". If you want to open the safe and spend the bitcoin in the UTXO, you must submit the correct input to the attached script. The script processes the input and if the function returns TRUE, then the BTC is yours to spend. The default script takes a single transaction signature as input and validates the signing key against the bitcoin address the output was delivered to. In general, the default bitcoin output script is not generally referred to as a smart contract. But it is possible to substitute that default script with one of your own. Maybe something "smarter" like a script that requires multiple signatures for example. These scripts began the talk of smart contracts. However, they are limited as designed. You can't program a loop, and all bitcoin scripts are passive. Meaning they only respond AFTER some external agent (think human) submits a transaction to the bitcoin network. So bitcoin scripts can't monitor outside sources for data. They have to wait for someone to give them something to do.
  7. No more public hints. I don't want to give unnecessary advantage to XRP competitors. Let them read the patent for themselves. But feel free to talk quietly amongst yourselves. I know some in the forum have a reasonable grasp of the goals and potential mechanisms.
  8. Could be. I didn't dig that far. Didn't look to see if they are still traded anyway. That can happen as well. I had some SnapSwap USD that I forgot about in one of my wallets. In closing out old accounts "trust lines" I managed to convert $6 of what I thought was worthless SnapSwap USD, into $10 of completely live Bitstamp USD. It took one payment and 4 seconds. Rippled found the deal for me. I wasn't even looking.
  9. Hyperledger might be one way to do this, but in reality ILP and Coil don't need it. They convert currencies as necessary to meet goals. So if lots of people setup access points around the world, they wouldn't have to agree on what currency they wanted to be paid in. Each could choose what worked best for themselves. The users of the access point DON'T need to hold any of those currencies. You might just hold XRP or whatever your local currency is. A Coil (ILP) payment pointer just says what the receiver want to receive in exchange for delivering some benefit. The "connectors" and payment routing algorithms determine the lowest cost payment path to make that happen.
  10. This is exactly the kind of conversation I wanted this thread to stir. One of the thinks I want all of you to think about is forming "teams" and looking for "co-founders". In reality, nobody invests in good ideas. The invest in competent motivated "teams" executing on a good idea. They really don't care whose idea is being executed on. So if you go to an inventor and say, "I have this great idea, and I want you to back me with your money." The first thing that investor will say is, "Who else have you convinced this is a good idea? How many of them signed up to help you day in and day out? (co-founders)" People tend to misunderstand startup Founders and CEOs. They think of them as "getting rich" off of everyone else's (employees) work. But in reality, for a startup, the title Founder and/or CEO means, "You get paid LAST!" Your employees always get paid FIRST. Otherwise the company would dissolve into thin air. Suppliers always get paid second. Otherwise the startup would have no resources to transform and create new value with. Way down the line at the end comes, pay the founder. So, keep that in mind as you kick around great ideas. If you can't execute on it all by yourself in private. Then your idea has no business being kept secret. It simply has no value that way. To make anything out of it, you will need to convince others it is a valuable idea to work on and/or purchase. In order to make any of that happen, you are going to need to form teams. So get started, NOW!
  11. So if Vitalik spent or transferred all his BTC, but also still owed his friend BTC, then NO the direct BTC settlement path would be dry. It would be up to Vitalik's friend to contact Vitalik, if he wished to "redeem" that BTC promise for actual BTC. But interestingly, it is also possible for Vitalik to offer his friend a price to convert that BTC debt to something else. Say BTC to XRP. Vitalik would do this by just putting an offer in the XRP Ledger that says, "I'll trade 0.04117 BTC (held by me) for X amount of XRP (sent to you), at any time." Once Vitalik submits that offer to the XRP Ledger, then 4-5 become valid again. Except now, the settlement asset is XRP.
  12. Curiously, I see the two as complementary. (Weird huh). I actually have a hidden post partially done that talks about different contracts mechanisms. I've only written about bitcoin "contracts". I'm just getting started discussion Ethereum (spelled it right this time!) contracts. After that I planned to talk about the insights that lead to Codius contracts. And finally, how ILP relates to all of it. But as a preview, just to show how they are different, I'll contrast one pair of differences; Ethereum is great for contract authors who want to remain anonymous. I think of them as "fire and forget" use cases. Like ERC-20 token issuances. The token creator can say, "I don't operate the token. I have no control of the token. I collected my ICO value up front through honest two party business transactions. (Buyer demand, Seller supply) Now the users of the token control its destiny. I'm not even involved anymore." And better they could do all of that without ever acknowledging who, in the real world, they are. It sounds cynical when I say it like that. But there are genuinely good use cases that fit into the "fire and forget" pattern as well. Distributed Autonomous Organizations (DAO) are one. Perhaps DAO's whose goals are to reform corrupt governments agains their will. Once there is a good Codius contract hosting ecosystem built, Codius could do all of that as well. But it is really much better designed for "keep honest people honest" use cases. So if you and I want to do a deal and I say, "I'll transfer title to X stock to you, if and only if you pay me Y amount of money." Then I can set up a non-anonymously authored Codius contract to show you my good faith. The Codius hosts have no stake in the contract (think AWS, Azure, Google cloud) except to see that it runs accurately and to completion. The hosts get paid for running the contract. Not for passing judgement on it. Because Codius contracts run off-chain, there are ZERO scaling issues. Users could spin up millions of contracts at the same time, each for their own needs. It wouldn't have any effect on the speed of the XRP Ledger at all.
  13. So yesterday wan't my favorite day. It seems that my PSA numbers took a significant jump. I'm going to have some more tests to figure out why the cancer didn't respond to treatment as well as expected. It isn't immediately life threatening. In fact, my number as still at the high end of the normal range for men in general. It is just that the numbers should be well on their way to the lowest end of that range by now. So on the scale of 1 (paper cut) to 10 (house lost in a hurricane), let's call this news a 2. I was hoping to stop thinking about it and move on. Now I need to think about it periodically, while still moving on. And that is what I'm going to use you fine folks for, distraction! Let's talk about and play with XRP and the XRP Ledger. That is way more fun than talking about life's little bumps in the road.
  • Create New...