KarmaCoverage

@GiddyUp I'm not sure of the legality of a bank Market Making on their own xCurrent ledger, but if they are essentially doing the same thing they do today with their N/V relationships, just using a new tool (xCurrent) then I wouldn't expect there to be any problem. --- Again I'm guessing here, but regarding the "all avaliable FX prices" I think about this from the perspective of the sender. So the xCurrent messaging layer (that precedes Settlement) should be able to collect the avaliable paths, and run a process to stack rank them and pick the cheapest combination. With the new ILP and "forward pathfinding" if the messaging layer does not bring back the path cost options, then there would only be each xCurrent ledger's pathfinding finding the cheapest path through that xCurrent ledger hop. This would yield the cheapest sum total path, because each how would be finding the cheapest path through that ledger/hop/leg. ---- This is sort of a pipe dream, and I don't mean that in a bad way, just reality is XRP will be traded on many markets/Orderbooks, both on XRPLedger and off. Think about this as similar to a stock of IBM... trading on the NYSE, the American exchange, the NADAQ, a European exchange, at their own internal option allocation values... etc (look for cross exchange arbitrage) The real word is just messy, but this is what opens up arbitrage opportunities for good traders like @tulo and by repeatedly taking those trades, the spread between the multi markets/orderbooks should shrink to somewhat of an overall consensus. That is how markets work. All of that aside, I personally look on XRPLedger orderbooks for price, that is truly the only markets where you can trade XRP.

I think I first saw Zopa around 2005, knew instantly it was using a weighted average. The "distributed pathfinding" was one of the bigger realizations, but it is nothing more than a weighted average in terms of math, preformed from the sender's perspective. This would be xPool's technical function. I think "streaming payments" enables probabilistic pathfinding, because if you send a value chunk, and it does not get to the destination.. then you can resend it via another path (your not going to try the failed path again) So it is not predetermined (the exact sum) of all paths which a payment's various chunks may travel down.

I'm really only a finance guy, or financial engineer, or market designer type. I see how to connect opportunity flow. Rippled is one hell of an accounting tool!... and that is a summation of my opinion on all basicly all of Crypto. I only know the Rippled IT stuff, so I understand the tool kit I'm working with. Honestly, it was obvious from the very begining that Ripple had high quality finance guys around. It is surely their guidence in what to develop that attracted me... well that and the tool! ...Now it's time to design applications, of which there are nearly endless possibilities.

Please let me know what is unclear. I will elaborate.

Yeah, given that I have already thought through most of this stuff for KarmaCoverage, I hoped I could take a somewhat quality swing at , what xPool could be, and how it may be stitched together. Just reread and definitely left out some key things, that I will have to touch on in the next segment on RippleNet topology.

https://medium.com/@KarmaCoverage/how-xpool-may-work-an-attempted-guess-daf3674f17c7 Here is what I have so far. Just to be clear, I have no insider information. I am simply a lone a financial engineer who happens to be familiar with Ripple's technology, mostly because of my efforts to configure the technology towards an application in the Risk Markets, aka KarmaCoverage. There will be another segment looking at the potential end state of the RippleNet topology, and the potential of SWIFT/BIS melding into RippleNet. I do plan to make a read through YouTube video on this write up, so that I can add some more color around some portions of this write up, as it is fairly advanced. To that end , please let me know what is not so easy to understand in the write up, and I will elaborate on those aspects in the video.

This was my take away, funny there is already an article on it. $100B is 10% of SWIFT daily cross-boarder payment traffic, that would make $1T per day roughly the market size for cross boarder payments, and there is probably some additional demand pent up due to the current high costs, then you have to add in machine-to-machine payment flows. This is going to be a very big market.

Good point. I guess if you wanted the stamp analogy to work, you would be putting a stamp (TX fee) on and mailing a box of stamps (value to be settled). Can you post links to the PDF? It looks like you have to subscribe to see the full article, unless I did something wrong (I got an old adobe error on the page)

This is why I always went with the Stamp analogy for XRP. RippleNet is the postal system, it costs an XRP stamp to move a package transaction through the network. I dont know how the post office is taxed on Stamp Revenue? I think the SEC chairman is wrong by the way. Few of these tokens actually have utility value in the first place, which makes looking at XRP in light of opinions rendered on other blockchains a pretty useless exercise at benchmarking apples to oranges.

Depends on how the loan would be set up. If Ripple lends you XRP (aka USC) it is your liability to Ripple, but if the point is to cross the boarder between and International USC (aka XRP) and fiat, then I think you would need a few more ledger entries. Ripple's loan of XRP to Bank Ripple's Asset, Bank's Liability in fiat Banks loan (or exchanges sell) to Users If loan: Banks Asset, User's Liability If Sale: Bank retires liability to Ripple, User has Asset (their bank fiat balance hit with "liability" to pay cash) As long as the Bank makes a spread between the two loans (from Ripple : to User) then this is starting to look like a very familiar business model to a banker... borrow short, lend long, make a spread using other people's capital. I'm imagining these as revolving credit lines that are continuously netting out transaction flows between banks, not fixed loans like a bond with an issue date and a maturity date. Same set up could be done, and to the best of my knowledge already does unfold everyday in fiat with Central Banks, and among their Domestic Bank members.

Looking in the the BIS, the Bank of International Settlements between Central banks, and some of the BIS work on CBCC (central bank crypto currency) I found this from Sept '17 https://www.bis.org/publ/qtrpdf/r_qt1709f.htm I read this as each country's central bank running their own Permissioned RCL, aka "USC" for domestic member banks. Maybe like Japan is doing? This chart is interesting, and they elaborate more on the grey areas if you go to the article. Seems like the Jasper project was Corda (R3) and if I'm understanding things right, Corda requires a Notary for Atomic settlement... which I believe is similar to how Ripple is currently running the ILP set up for banks using xCurrent in Atomic Mode, which requires a Notary. When ILP Universal mode goes live, I believe that the central Notary (presumably Ripple Inc) will be shut down also, as Universal mode does not require a Notary function. On the topic of Central Banks issuing CBCC, into a atomic system architecture where they play the role of a central Notary seems to make sense. I think this leaves 2 options, A. Corda type systems without a "native digital asset" or B. Ripple type systems with a "native digital asset" used as a "Utility Settlement Coin". Both are good options, for domestic systems, one is not an option without a Central Notary. This link has some info on current systems and Liquidity Saving Mechanisms. Basically all about Net Settlement, and matching payments in a cue... sounds a lot like PayChan with some Pathfinding, or payment routing mixed in.

Everything combined is "RippleNet". @BANKXRP go a link for that image? I think I remember seeing that before but not sure where. I also saw a new updated image for RuppleNet, not that cartoon thing I have posted before.

Theoretically the banks running xCurrent could issue BTC on their own ledger, or maybe an Exchange or a BTC whale could issue BTC on XRPLedger (but wouldn't that negate Lightning Network?). Anyway, why don’t you worry about actual banks or even tackling the intended use case for BTC. Again in all seriousness, hopefully you convert your BTC into XRP before it's too late. The only reason I think BTC will spike again, is so the whales can liquidate or get good conversion rates into XRP... ..that, and some are sure to truly believe in Santa Clause. They will grow out of that with time, some slower than others.

You are correct, and for this very reason XRP will over take BTC. How many banks (fiat custodians) are running BTC software, zero. Don't think that when Exchanges list XRP, that Ripple won't insist on XRP being the key pairing with Fiat. The part about the devs is sort of a good point, but don't confuse devs with business visionaries, most arnt.

One can always wish upon a star. Maybe someone should buy a star in the intergalactic star rigestry and name it after a Bitcoin address, then BTC can get the first mover on going inter-steller (pun intended). In all seriousness, both SWIFT at the bank level, and BIS at the Central Bank level are networks. As RippleNet is assembled, both of the old networks will become RippleNet nodes. There is a reason you don't run 2 train tracks next to each other... as you put it "network effects" will be #1