Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About pointbreak

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Far from pissed Galaxy has been a long term Ripple investor, he has major exposure to XRP upside. Makes you think, if even Ripple investors think Ripple holds to much XRP then..... Maybe they do?
  2. Massive loss with Josh aka "ShinyThings" moving on and Warren Paul in the last couple of months. I wonder how morale is within Ripple at the moment, major events like the SEC disaster generally result in high attrition hopefully that does not hamper shipping new and innovative products.
  3. Novogratz is far from a Maxi, he has significant investment in allot of shit coin projects. His commentary is fair IMO; there has been good signs in the court case to date, which can explain the surge as a win being priced in, but this case may drag on for a long time to come. If you are over reacting to a fairly astute player in this field (that is invested in Ripple) being critical of the price movement, you are likely to personally invested. I would guess that he is more economic interest that anyone on this forum with Ripple + XRP being successful, that does not mean he cant hold view
  4. https://fintechnews.sg/48827/payments/blockchain-firm-lightnet-expands-payout-services-across-se-asia-with-moneygram/
  5. Ripple in typical fashion is just being selective with the narrative, yes 10% of the XRP exchange volume occurs outside of US. However, the ODL volume primarily originates from US (US -> Mexico corridor, USD -> Philippines).
  6. Anticipate it will be deemed "not a security" but Ripple, Brad and Chris will be forced pay some form of fine selling it as a security. The best thing the community could do right now is make suggestions to change the protocol that would dilute Ripples control over the protocol (burn founder allocation and reduce Ripples XRP holdings by 20-30%). Any action from Ripple i.e donating to a foundation similar to the Etherum foundation would be viewed as an act of guilt vs helping further decentralize, this should have been done years ago. Community needs to vote with their wallet (donatio
  7. There are simply other assets that will significantly outperform XRP for the time being, no real point being invested if you live in a country with no capital gains tax and can freely move in and out My 10k XRP contribution still stands with @tulo as a fund to decentralized the network further by removing or reducing founder and Ripple XRP allocation. The fact that there is no community that is willing to invest (time, money or technical resources) in creating a developing this segregation between XRP and Ripple really solidifies that there is little community that cares for anything oth
  8. From a technical stand point this work and is operational. If the original design (2013-2014) was scaled and evolved to meet its regulatory requirements, be less dependent on Ripple then I think it would have been more successful while reducing the contractual issue mentioned above. When it comes to regulated entities covering them self from both the compliance and liability standpoint this design presents challenges. Generally speaking (in its current design) all financial institutes using ODL would be required to enter into a specific agreement with their counter part in the receiving
  9. Nostro vostro accounts are not nearly as big an issue as Ripple makes them out to be, the main problem with the Nostro vostro arrangement is that they are generally signed between two parties i.e HSBC in the United Kingdom and Banco Bradesco in Brazil, solving the bi-lateral or trilateral agreement issue is what can help release the funds tied up within these arrangements. Ripple does not really solve this problem with its ODL problem as the parties are still required to enter into multiple agreements i.e HSBC, Branco and Bitstamp. If a new corridor is to be introduced say into Mexico this add
  10. Another 10k here - Burning the full developer allocation is no problem, they have sold more than enough for a lifetime. Question is how much XRP to burn from Ripple? burning the full allocation would likely do further harm to the ecosystem but 50-75% burning seems fair and preserves enough allocation. Question is I doubt any of the "independent validators" like @Wietseetc that have likely taken grants from Ripple would be willing to vote on the proposed amendments even if the overwhelming consensus in the community is in favour of doing so.
  11. Burning XRP would be a great twist of events in this saga and a nice little F* you to the sec, showing the power of true centralisation. How much to burn is the question, no doubt all founders have made enough to live multiple life times, but too much pain to Ripple the company and its employees is likely to cause more harm to the price. Leaves the question how much to burn? - All founder holdings or at minimum 90% - Half of all XRP currently held in escrow (allowing the business to still thrive and support the ecosystem, while burning the majority ownership. This would also lik
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.