jn_r

Ah yes. So maybe not the amount of N/V accounts itself, that would stay the same, but the amount in the N/V accounts would be less

I always try a telnet session over the correct port to see if it is reachable. Then I get this: > telnet xrpl.ws 443 Trying 172.67.74.123... Connected to xrpl.ws. Escape character is '^]'. ^] telnet> Do you see you can connect? (I can btw also connect to s2. s1 closes on me right away)

why don't you connect to wss://xrpl.ws from https://xrpl.ws/? It is much better..

It is unlikely that CBDC's will want to do KYC/AML themselves. And other reasons like that, i.e. reason being it is not the primary job of a Central Bank. We will likely have institutions that the end-user will have to go through to make use of the CBDC. These institutions could be like the current banks or maybe directly payment service providers. I wonder if with CBDC's the amount of nostro/vostro accounts needed would become less, as there would be one CDBC ledger for all banks in a country?

So he's mentioning that the first 4 years or so there is no usage of XRP because there was no xRapid or ODL. I don't agree with that. The first usage of the network was the DEX and XRP the native coin was used to protect the network and also to serve as bridge currency, same as xRapid and ODL, only this time it was on the DEX.

Yes I think that's about it.

That sounds logical, but I am not lawyer ;-) The issue also I think is, if Ripple would have sold under 501 D they would have made the statement that it is a security. Not so much a problem for the initial sales, but more so for exchanges, because if XRP would be a security for everybody, then we would not be able to trade in on the exchanges. So there is a need for new law, to determine when an asset (or ICO) is a security and when it is no more. This is also why Ripple is pressing for #DCEA, which makes exactly that split

Mary Jo White apparently is representing Ripple for quite some time already, at least since June 2018 on a related, perhaps same matter: https://www.coindesk.com/former-sec-chair-represents-ripple-xrp-lawsuit

Another fresh daily load of XRP :-) https://bithomp.com/explorer/B7EDFB724807964F7D2578E724120069EB3A4208120CE6A0A714EBF129E5FEB1

I think for the ODL use-case of Ripple the DEX is irrelevant, they use the CEX in the relevant countries and only XRP to cross the boarders. It would be interesting if Polkadot or on Ethereum an autobridge would be built. As matter of fact Uniswap (and Sushiswap) already have it, if you place an order in Uniswap from assetA to assetB, it automatically searches for the cheapest routes from a predetermined set of paths. I know at least assetA->assetB, assetA->ETH->assetB and assetA-USDC->assetB are among those paths. And on top of that there exists aggregators like 1inch.exchang

not yet updated for the 18th..

This should be interesting, not? Ripple and Jed apparently agree that Jed can sell his part of XRP and he is selling it for Bitstamp.USD. How does that relate to the SEC law suit? Is Jed off the hook? No American is allowed to trade XRP on any exchange .. If anyone can shed some light on this ...

Same old, same old, Jed is back in business :-)

Still, this could mark a change in insight of either Ripple or Jed causing them to change behaviour. Curious if tomorrow the same amount will be transacted..

Hmm, little I know about the Avax protocol, but there are several kinds what I understood. I'm not sure if the Flare consensus protocol is the same or if it is adapted Here is the Flare consensus protocol explained: https://flare.ghost.io/flare-consensus-protocol-an-explainer/ ( that looks pretty complicated )