Jump to content

JoelKatz

Ripple Employee
  • Content Count

    884
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    82

Everything posted by JoelKatz

  1. Sorry to disappoint you guys but we're actually just buying a pizza. Brad Garlinghouse insisted I put a wink on this so everyone would know that i wasn't serious. So.
  2. I don't know who is selling Ripple shares, but I suspect that sellers likely fall into three categories: 1) Early investors who are anxious to have a materialized profit on their records. Some of our investors put their money in three years ago and would like to demonstrate a cash profit on their balance sheets to help build the case that they should have larger funds investing in the space. 2) Former employees who can't afford to exercise their shares and hold them. When you leave the company, you have a limited time to exercise your vested shares or you forfeit them. This can be ex
  3. It's kind of hilarious that the primary source of their bearishness is actually our biggest feature -- you can use the system and still get benefits even if there's no XRP liquidity, but if there is, you get even more benefits.
  4. The numbers given in the first post are roughly accurate. The upside of shares over XRP: Ripple might earn revenue from sources other than XRP and you might get a share of that. The price of shares of Ripple is low compared to the value of the proportional share of Ripple's XRP. You become a shareholder of Ripple with particular legal rights. Even if Ripple fails in the payments arena, if XRP succeeds anyhow, you could still benefit because Ripple holds so much XRP. It's an illiquid asset, so it's possible it's very underpriced. The upside of XRP over sha
  5. "There is clear manipulation to keep XRP under 0.30, and there is obviously new XRP coming into circulation monthly form the company selling it off, but how much XRP have they sold to banks, and not speculators and traders like us?" I'm not sure why you say there's clear manipulation. Do you think Ripple wants the price of XRP to be under 30 cents? A higher price for XRP means we make more money selling XRP if nothing else. Also, are you claiming that Ripple selling XRP to banks is somehow a bad thing? Aren't they the least likely to put that XRP back into circulation and don't they have
  6. I'm already working on the XRP $100 party. Helicopters will take everyone to the private island: https://www.privateislandsonline.com/united-states/florida/pumpkin-key We'll have helicopter service to and from the island during the party. At the end of the party, we will have a drawing, and the winner will get to keep the island.
  7. Why not require people to carry transparent wallets in plain view too?
  8. A higher price tends to correlate with more liquidity. It's not really a direct cause and effect relationship, but they tend to move in tandem. The ideal situation for Ripple would be an increasing price over the long term with few downward spikes. This would increase Ripple's value and revenue which not only makes Ripple's stockholders and Board of Directors happy but also increase Ripple's ability to deploy resources to incentivize partnerships and build the ecosystem. This would also reduce the cost of holding XRP. If the upside is worth more than the downside, FIs can hold XRP an
  9. I wonder if you're using online delete (a feature that shrinks the databases regularly by purging old data) and it started or ended a purge around that time.
  10. This article's supposed bombshell conclusion is that XRP is not needed for Ripple's payment technology to be useful to Ripple's customers. That is actually a succinct statement of Ripple's strategy and to paint it as a negative is somewhat ridiculous.
  11. When a server makes requests from you, you "charge" it. If the server exceeds its "credit limit", it is disconnected. If needed, the IP address is banned for a period of time. Connection attempts during the ban cause the ban to be extended. Servers in a cluster "gossip" about IP addresses that have put heavy server or client load on them and ban them from the cluster. I have no heard any reports of this mechanism being insufficient to protect servers from abuse.
  12. To my knowledge, nobody at Poloniex has ever reached out to us. We have contacted them several different ways to offer advice, security reviews, and the like. We have not heard back, at least not as far as I know.
  13. As I've argued elsewhere, I'm becoming more and more convinced that the entire way we regulate financial institutions in the United States no longer makes any sense. We got to where we are by putting a series of band aids and fixes to completely change the system over time and we wound up with a Frankenstein's monster of pieces that don't fit together. This is probably the best article I've written on the subject: https://steemit.com/politics/@joelkatz/the-war-on-cash But I need to make a longer version that makes my core argument more clearly. The core idea is this: We now regu
  14. If you have access to a machine with npm and node, do this: 1) Create a new directory. Go into it. 2) Create a filed called "coldwallet.js" with the following contents: 3) Type "npm install ripple-keypairs". An error about a missing manifest is normal. Now type "node coldwallet.js" to generate a cold wallet. The output will look like this: 4) Run it a few times and make sure you get different output each time. If paranoid, you can test one of the secrets in an online or desktop wallet to make sure you get the matching Ripple address back. Don't use that one, of course
  15. Sure. But you can't reverse the intermediary payments to market makers. Consider a hypothetical: They payment is USD->MXN. So internally, there's a USD->XRP transfer and an XRP->MXN transfer. These transfers are irreversible. So if, for example, the MXN can't be accepted at the destination for some reason, you can reverse the entire payment. You'll pay four spreads (two each way) but the loss will be comparable to the losses associated with similar failures today. So, yes, you can ask the Mexican partner to return the MXN. But that only works if you got the right number of M
  16. The first time you deposit to Poloniex, they will take about 20.5 XRP from your deposit to fund a pointless extra wallet on the ledger. This also makes their deposit process take about three times longer than it should.
  17. Probably the best way is to make sure that Nik, myself, or someone else at Ripple reports that they've passed it to our legal/fraud contact in the company. Unfortunately, dealing with these things often takes longer than we'd like, but we do get them removed. They do pop back up though. I reported wallet-ripple.com and xrp-storage.com to our BSA/investigation team at around 10PM on November 15th when I first heard about it. They acknowledged the following morning. By close of business that day, seven hours after my report, they had already started sending notices.
  18. Not yet. The thing that came the closest to getting me in trouble was this: https://steemit.com/politics/@joelkatz/the-war-on-cash I still think it's probably the best thing I've ever written and really need to make a longer version to make my key argument even more explicit.
  19. I wish I could, but I don't think there's any more information that I can release. It gets very close to releasing information about specific partnerships, which I cannot do without the consent of the partner. In one of the earlier posts, I implied something that's not exactly right, and I can't untangle it without releasing information I can't release. So I kind of got too close to that line already. There are other partners using or testing xRapid. But Cuallix is the only one that we have announced yet.
  20. I think we're right at that critical point now where we are starting to pivot some customers to XRP for some corridors. We have enough adoption now and enough value and liquidity in XRP that that's realistic. Cuallix is, so far, the only announced partnership of this type. The main limiting factor right now is everyone having enough confidence that the system is going to work correctly that they're willing to flip the switch and let it make large, irreversible payments without intervention. This means, for example, correctly handling a large variety of failure/error cases which, though unlikel
  21. RippleNet is sort of agnostic to how the money moves. You can use traditional correspondent banking. You can use a RippleNet member that has the reach you need (like EarthPort). Or you can use XRP. Right now, most destinations are not reachable through XRP, so you still need nostro/vostro accounts or you need to use a partner that has them. This is kind of our two-phase plan. The lack of XRP liquidity does not prevent people from getting value from RippleNet. So we can continue to build the network and find the corridors where XRP liquidity can really make a difference and then incentiviz
  22. I think we would do that if we had to. But it's very dangerous. You want an FI to commit and to spend their own money so they're motivated to get as much out of it as possible. We can't work with everyone at once, so being willing to spend money acts as a good way to select those institutions that really are committed to making it work. As I said, I don't think we'd let this be an obstacle to something really good though. If an FI couldn't hold XRP or couldn't tolerate the volatility or had some other obstacle and there was some way we could make that obstacle go away, we would if we had
  23. I do believe that people have a right to know and understand what Ripple's prospects are and what the risks are. I see a lot of people focusing on what I think are the wrong risks. For example, I don't think Bitcoin and Swift are really potential competitors because neither of them is trying to do what Ripple's doing. (Ripple is much more harmed by bad things happening to bitcoin than good things.) I could be wrong about that, of course, but that's my view. When I say "who knows", what I mean is that I don't know of any specific reason or way that this particular risk would materialize. B
  24. The experts we have used to design our programmatic sales system tell us that a 20 basis point net sales preference should have only a negligible effect on the price. Our programmatic sales is not part of any intentional attempt to stabilize or depress the price. I'm hardly an expert on this subject, but I admit that I do find it somewhat difficult to believe that the effect on price is negligible. That just doesn't seem intuitively right to me. However, my own back of the envelope math suggests that the price is probably about one cent lower now than it would have been had Ripple stopped
  25. You're welcome. It's kind of randomish when I sleep. Generally, during the week I get very little sleep and then I binge sleep on the weekends. I'm told that's not possible for humans to do, but it seems to work for me. So ...
×
×
  • 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.