Jump to content

Professor Hantzen

Bronze Contributor
  • Content count

    493
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from OzAlphaWolf in Is Miguel Vias still working for Ripple?   
    His most recent Ripple-related tweet was on June 18th, not long ago, and there are many immediately before that.  If archive.org doesn't show him on the leadership page since May 9th, it means he hasn't been on that page for months (if he ever was?), yet has still been completely active in his role as Director of XRP Markets whilst not on that page.  So I wouldn't be alarmed... yet.
  2. Sad
    Professor Hantzen reacted to MrX in Is Miguel Vias still working for Ripple?   
    I've noticed that @miguel deleted all mentions of Ripple from his twitter profile and removed the "wallpaper" with the "dawn" (yeah, it is funny, but still). He also disappeared from company staff-list (https://ripple.com/company/leadership/). I'm a bit concerned.
  3. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to PG1 in Interview: Ripple’s chief cryptographer on bitcoin and the company's changing strategy   
    http://www.bobsguide.com/guide/news/2018/Jul/4/interview-ripples-chief-cryptographer-on-bitcoin-and-the-companys-changing-strategy/
  4. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from hyakutake1349 in What Is Going On With Ripple and Coinbase?   
    A moonbase, to some.
  5. Like
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from hyakutake1349 in What Is Going On With Ripple and Coinbase?   
    A moonbase, to some.
  6. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to Atomic1221 in A detailed, technical Stellar XLM (SCP) vs Ripple XRP (xRPL/RCL) thread   
    I posted this on Reddit as rebuttal to when someone was going at me for defending XRP on r/Cryptocurrency. I thought I might actually explain to him why Stellar was inferior technically instead of just a subjective judgement. The only exception where Stellar>Ripple is for P2P usage, but that's it..and only for right now. 
    I know a lot of people have been discussing Stellar vs Ripple over here, so I figured I might open up some technical discussion on the topic.
    If you have anything to add, please feel free. I've been taking a deep dive on the mathematical aspect of tokens. CAP theorem, game theory, Sybil attacks, timestamp manipulation, scalability etc. I  don't believe all that stuff should be reserved for the programmers to know, so I'll probably keep adding to this thread so we can have some insights into the DNA of all the different tokens out there. 
     
    Original Thread:
    https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/7x750o/without_stellar_banks_wouldnt_think_about_ripple/du6ucbk/?context=3&st=jdm2435h&sh=c53e680a
     
    P.S I've been taking arms against the FUD on Ripple XRP over in r/cryptocurrency. You know what? The tides are turning and the guys who call XRP "shitcoin" are not getting 50 upvotes anymore; now they're getting downvoted. I've managed to open some minds as well; and had people admit that they were mistaken in their negative views of XRP. 
    Thanks for all the Likes & Thanks! It's nice to have made my online home here with you guys. XRPChat is truly one of the best online communities out there . It's my pleasure to put all this together for you guys. 

     
    =====Edits=====
    Fixed.
     
  7. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to mDuo13 in Understanding Flag Integer Values when Mutiple flags are set   
    Continuing from what tulo said, to check whether flags are set, use the AND operator (&). For example:
    tfSetfAuth = 0x00010000 tfSetNoRipple = 0x00020000 tfSetFreeze = 0x00100000 Flags = 2147680256 // tfFullyCanonicalSig, tfSetfAuth, and tfSetNoRipple are enabled if (Flags & tfSetNoRipple) { // True console.log("Flags include tfSetNoRipple") } else { console.log("Flags don't include tfSetNoRipple") } if (Flags & tfSetFreeze) { // False console.log("Flags include tfSetFreeze") } else { console.log("Flags don't include tfSetFreeze") }  
  8. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to tulo in Understanding Flag Integer Values when Mutiple flags are set   
    BTW, even if they look weird it's actually a sum of the values of the flag.
    Imagine you have flags:
    A --> 1 decimal (1 binary) B --> 2 decimal (10 binary) C --> 4 decimal (100 binary) D --> 8 decimal (1000 binary) E --> 16 decimal (10000 binary) If you have D+B, it's 1010 binary which is 10 decimal (8+2).
    If you have C+D+E, it's 11100 binary which is 28 decimal (16+8+4).
    The JS code pointed by @Professor Hantzen is the most correct to "decode" flags.
    To compose flags just use the OR operator. For example:
    const flagA = 1; //you can use also const flagA = 0b1 in ES6 const flagB = 2; //you can use also const flagB = 0b10 in ES6 var flagAB = flagA | flagB;  
  9. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to SBC-Daniel in Understanding Flag Integer Values when Mutiple flags are set   
    Thanks for the responses. I can see how it’s more efficient and somewhat similar as how web developers minify css and JS code before a production launch.
    I’m a web developer that has primarily handled front-end development of websites in my career.  (Read 0% experience with C++) I’m actively attempting to learn more about RCL so I can expand my contributions to SBC’s development team beyond making the interfaces of our products. Thanks for making that process a bit easier. 
  10. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from SBC-Daniel in Understanding Flag Integer Values when Mutiple flags are set   
    No problem.  The reason its done this way is presumably for speed within rippled when processing account information.  In C++ - the langage rippled is primarily written in, and what is generally regarded as a language used for projects requiring fast run-time - this is a very typical construct to store this kind of information.  If you come across code that reduces things to bits, and requires bitwise operators, it is almost always done this way as a speed optimisation.  (By taking something a human readily understands and storing it in a manner a computer readily "understands".)
  11. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from SBC-Daniel in Understanding Flag Integer Values when Mutiple flags are set   
    These are bit flags.  They look weird as decimal values, but as binary values they make a lot more sense, eg, a few are "on", and the rest are "off".  So 194 might appear to contain little immediately useful information, but its binary equivalent %11000010 shows which three flags would be considered to be switched on.

    So, in JS you need to do this kind of thing:
    var containsFlag = function(number, flag) { return (number & flag) === flag; }; containsFlag(129, 128); // true containsFlag(81, 128); // false (Source: This Stack Overflow question.)

    The difference in the case of Ripple Account flags is they are all presently higher order bits, but the principle is the same, you just need to shift the bits to the right (note that if they enabled more flags in the lower order this would change and you'd have to adjust your code accordingly).

    Thus, if you saw an account with the flags set as 17891328, you'd just need to:
    (17891328 >>> 16).toString(2) // '100010001' To reveal the flags.  In this case, lsfDepositAuth, lsfDisableMaster and lsfPasswordSpent, as per this list.

    (If you order the available flags in such a list by their descendent decimal value, they will correspond to the bits resulting from the above piece of code when read from left to right.)
  12. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen reacted to Sukrim in When are New Offers "Applied"?   
    Something along the lines of:
    Take all 11 transactions that should be applied currently
    Sort them
    Hash them (so everyone with those same 11 transactions will come to the same hash)
    Take a PRNG algorithm and use the hash calculated above as the seed
    Use that seeded algorithm to determine which account comes first, which second etc.
    This leads to an ordering that's dependent on both the content of transactions (which include signatures, wich include a lot of entropy hopefully) as well as the subset of transactions itself (so if Deepak's second transaction makes it to only one validator in time to be evaluated, it'll come to a completely different ordering because it'll look at 12 transactions and will quickly have to change its mind).
    Not verified with the actual code, just what I remember from the discussions about the issues with being able to "mine" transactions before this was implemented. Nik or David probably can explain it better.
  13. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen reacted to mDuo13 in When are New Offers "Applied"?   
    Correct.
     
    rippled / the XRP Ledger does not ensure transactions (of any type) are processed in the order they are received. Doing that is not necessary to solve the double spend problem. To solve the double-spend problem, you must only ensure that every participant agrees on the order in which transactions execute and consequently what their outcomes are. In fact, a big part of the double spend problem is that different parties have different perspectives on the order in which transactions were received.
    For the most part, transactions are processed in the next ledger after they're received, with transactions that get into the same ledger being more or less randomly ordered. (It's deterministic, but hard to predict; and also, transactions from the same sender are relatively ordered by increasing sequence number.) The exact canonical ordering code is kind of complicated. You can see some discussion in this GitHub issue. Maybe an example would make this clearer:
     
    Suppose Alanis, Beethoven, Ciu, and Deepak each have XRP Ledger accounts and are sending transactions that arrive around the same time. Consensus approves a set of transactions that includes (in no particular order):
    A1, A2, and A3 sent by Alanis, where A1 is Alanis's lowest sequence transaction and the others are one sequence number higher each B1 and B2 sent by Beethoven, where B1 is Beethoven's lowest sequence number C1, C2, C3, C4, and C5 sent by Ciu, again ordered by increasing sequence number D1 sent by Deepak. One possible canonical ordering for this set could be:
    D1 B1 B2 A1, A2 C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 A3 First, the ordering of accounts is set based on some unpredictable hash (to be honest I don't know exactly how this works). Then all transactions by those accounts are attempted in sequence order. Some transactions may fail but are retriable. (For example, A3 attempted to spend money that isn't received until C4 is processed.) Then retriable transactions are processed.
     
  14. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to pucksterpete in A BOT EXPOSED :)   
    Last year around August 2017 I noticed an address https://bithomp.com/explorer/rENDnFwR3CPvrsPjD9XXeqVoXeVt2CpPWX  popping up on the XRP/EUR market placing orders and taken them down quickly and putting them back up.  I figured okay must be a bot. 
    Didn't really think anymore about it, because at that time I was making pretty good € with arbitrage trading.
    Since the Jan 2018 drop, I have noticed more bots and the spread tighten.  Making money on arbitrage like I did last year is way down.
    So, tonight, I though, why not track this address back to its origins and here's what I found
    Bot's address  https://bithomp.com/explorer/rENDnFwR3CPvrsPjD9XXeqVoXeVt2CpPWX
    activate by https://bithomp.com/explorer/rpejtTP225Sx3mqbHCqRTFUFkLjBB8581T
    activated by https://bithomp.com/explorer/rEEUym1oU5N846HdDBxVTvyNnx2DycH1tz
    activate by TWO RIVERS FX https://bithomp.com/explorer/rUVarwZCovdngR2JSSViq1YUabxuWqm8es  TWO RIVERS TRADING GROUP LLC,ZONE EQUITY GROUP, LLC  14 WALL STREET, SUITE 8B
    NEW YORK, NY 10005
    activated by Ardizzone https://bithomp.com/explorer/rHjd15L6VeLQaRcKDq9wjhSkQxAF6bq7X7     STEPHEN EDWARD ARDIZZONE   MANAGING MEMBER/ALLIED MEMBER
    activate by Constantine  https://bithomp.com/explorer/rs5jBEHicYCWav7qbRMYUrVaoAwS2o6uww  CONSTANTINOS YOUSSIS  MANAGING MEMBER, https://www.linkedin.com/in/constantine-youssis-68a39382
    activate by https://bithomp.com/explorer/rG5TeUE2JFYXgeaLtGQT8Uymdk2BtLKyVV
    activate by https://bithomp.com/explorer/rpcRgbYy9CUAYADeueKmAKZz12wXi9fVNS
    activate by OpenCoin https://bithomp.com/explorer/r9H8UWStzcajob8qkL7ZNQXjFpRfEnEvyE
    activate by Ripple https://bithomp.com/explorer/rJR7gjNe3DpJ7kpB4CHBxjDKfwVMpTKPpj
    activate by OpenCoin.1  https://bithomp.com/explorer/r3kmLJN5D28dHuH8vZNUZpMC43pEHpaocV
    Now, a lot of the accounts created before TWO RIVERS Account have created a plenty of other accounts, but the https://bithomp.com/explorer/rENDnFwR3CPvrsPjD9XXeqVoXeVt2CpPWX has been very busy everyday in the EUR, USD, BTC, ETH/XRP markets.
    I wonder who TWO RIVERS is trading XRP for?
    https://brokercheck.finra.org/firm/summary/158549
    https://www.insider-monitor.com/trader/cik1242748.html
    https://www.bloomberg.com/profiles/companies/NMX:US-nymex-holdings-inc

    Anyways that is all I know

  15. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Javim777 in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Well, it's relative.  XRP has existed for 5 years.  For the past 6 months, its been significantly higher than it's been in the 4.5 years prior.  So, for greater than 90% of the time XRP has been around, if you bought it, you'd have good reason to be happy at all points so far this year - whether it's at $3.35 or $0.45.
    Nobody knows the future, but XRP and Ripple's fundamentals are looking way better than they have during the previous 5 years, and it made most of its magnificent performance so far without them, and with a much higher risk factor for investors.  Looks pretty good to me.
  16. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to Ripple-Stiltskin in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Completely off topic:  congrats with the bronze medal @Professor Hantzen ( I remember a specific post about Market Cap very well). Its deserved and your posts are always appreciated. 
  17. Like
    Professor Hantzen reacted to xrphilosophy in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Boom.  People need some perspective.  Some people literally don't understand they absolutely DO NOT belong in a highly speculative market.  It's an adult game, not a video game...
  18. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Javim777 in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Well, it's relative.  XRP has existed for 5 years.  For the past 6 months, its been significantly higher than it's been in the 4.5 years prior.  So, for greater than 90% of the time XRP has been around, if you bought it, you'd have good reason to be happy at all points so far this year - whether it's at $3.35 or $0.45.
    Nobody knows the future, but XRP and Ripple's fundamentals are looking way better than they have during the previous 5 years, and it made most of its magnificent performance so far without them, and with a much higher risk factor for investors.  Looks pretty good to me.
  19. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Javim777 in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Well, it's relative.  XRP has existed for 5 years.  For the past 6 months, its been significantly higher than it's been in the 4.5 years prior.  So, for greater than 90% of the time XRP has been around, if you bought it, you'd have good reason to be happy at all points so far this year - whether it's at $3.35 or $0.45.
    Nobody knows the future, but XRP and Ripple's fundamentals are looking way better than they have during the previous 5 years, and it made most of its magnificent performance so far without them, and with a much higher risk factor for investors.  Looks pretty good to me.
  20. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Javim777 in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Well, it's relative.  XRP has existed for 5 years.  For the past 6 months, its been significantly higher than it's been in the 4.5 years prior.  So, for greater than 90% of the time XRP has been around, if you bought it, you'd have good reason to be happy at all points so far this year - whether it's at $3.35 or $0.45.
    Nobody knows the future, but XRP and Ripple's fundamentals are looking way better than they have during the previous 5 years, and it made most of its magnificent performance so far without them, and with a much higher risk factor for investors.  Looks pretty good to me.
  21. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Javim777 in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Well, it's relative.  XRP has existed for 5 years.  For the past 6 months, its been significantly higher than it's been in the 4.5 years prior.  So, for greater than 90% of the time XRP has been around, if you bought it, you'd have good reason to be happy at all points so far this year - whether it's at $3.35 or $0.45.
    Nobody knows the future, but XRP and Ripple's fundamentals are looking way better than they have during the previous 5 years, and it made most of its magnificent performance so far without them, and with a much higher risk factor for investors.  Looks pretty good to me.
  22. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Javim777 in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Well, it's relative.  XRP has existed for 5 years.  For the past 6 months, its been significantly higher than it's been in the 4.5 years prior.  So, for greater than 90% of the time XRP has been around, if you bought it, you'd have good reason to be happy at all points so far this year - whether it's at $3.35 or $0.45.
    Nobody knows the future, but XRP and Ripple's fundamentals are looking way better than they have during the previous 5 years, and it made most of its magnificent performance so far without them, and with a much higher risk factor for investors.  Looks pretty good to me.
  23. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Javim777 in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Well, it's relative.  XRP has existed for 5 years.  For the past 6 months, its been significantly higher than it's been in the 4.5 years prior.  So, for greater than 90% of the time XRP has been around, if you bought it, you'd have good reason to be happy at all points so far this year - whether it's at $3.35 or $0.45.
    Nobody knows the future, but XRP and Ripple's fundamentals are looking way better than they have during the previous 5 years, and it made most of its magnificent performance so far without them, and with a much higher risk factor for investors.  Looks pretty good to me.
  24. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Javim777 in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Well, it's relative.  XRP has existed for 5 years.  For the past 6 months, its been significantly higher than it's been in the 4.5 years prior.  So, for greater than 90% of the time XRP has been around, if you bought it, you'd have good reason to be happy at all points so far this year - whether it's at $3.35 or $0.45.
    Nobody knows the future, but XRP and Ripple's fundamentals are looking way better than they have during the previous 5 years, and it made most of its magnificent performance so far without them, and with a much higher risk factor for investors.  Looks pretty good to me.
  25. Thanks
    Professor Hantzen got a reaction from Javim777 in When does everyone admit they were wrong?   
    Well, it's relative.  XRP has existed for 5 years.  For the past 6 months, its been significantly higher than it's been in the 4.5 years prior.  So, for greater than 90% of the time XRP has been around, if you bought it, you'd have good reason to be happy at all points so far this year - whether it's at $3.35 or $0.45.
    Nobody knows the future, but XRP and Ripple's fundamentals are looking way better than they have during the previous 5 years, and it made most of its magnificent performance so far without them, and with a much higher risk factor for investors.  Looks pretty good to me.
×