zero-2-9

Member
  • Content count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

zero-2-9 last won the day on October 19 2015

zero-2-9 had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About zero-2-9

  • Rank
    Member
  1. You´re set to go..
  2. You´re set to go..
  3. http://docdro.id/GkjRI2w
  4. Very interesting. Here´s a direct link to the original paper. TL;DR In this paper the authors present PathJoin, a novel protocol to perform atomic transactions in the Ripple network. They use use PathJoin and DiceMix, "the most efficient P2P mixing protocol existing in the literature", to build PathShuffle, a practical decentralized path mixing protocol for credit networks. Then they implemented PathShuffle and carried out a path mixing among five users in the currently deployed Ripple network, thereby actually demonstrating the practicality of PathShuffle to provide anonymous transactions Is any of the authors by any chance active on this forum?
  5. They will surely use it for domestic payments, thus not only international payments, as for domestic payments there is a also a clear incentive: ""Domestic payments are actually very expensive, it's 5x to 10x more expensive than in the US". Their new toy will solve this. POS payments are then only a logical next step if the user base is large enough. And the consortium seems to achieve this when all banks involved make their apps 'Ripple-powered'.
  6. I think this also is an important part of the story (shows their involvement (11.3%), a clear incentive)):
  7. Ripple (the company) bought the URL ripple.com from a Grateful Dead fan
  8. They don't go live in March and April. Your information seems incorrect. The Japanese Bank Consortium / SBI Ripple Asia activities are interesting, but "the group has set a March 2017 deadline for delivery of a proof-of-concept ahead of a full commercial build". Thus proof of concept, nothing more. I've seen spring 2017 mentioned as a make or break moment on this forum before, based on the Japanese Bank Consortium / SBI Ripple Asia announcements, but I think the announcement was lost in translation in some cases (it is a proof of concept i.s.o. real use), and that its implications are overestimated. At least for the short term.
  9. Via Google translate: Response @nikb (thank you, clear answer):
  10. https://ripple.com/build/transaction-cost/
  11. The thing is that in this case $0.35 is exactly the same as $0.008 (0.35USD.payroutes ~ 0.008USD.Gatehub). Well not exactly the same: I guess you can trust Gatehub to send you your USD, where in case of Payroutes this is not certain at all. Be aware.
  12. No bug. Explanation can be found here: TLDR: The issue is that Coinmarketcap includes a gateway that issues USD (in this case USD.payroutes) that is valued a lot lower than USD from gateways that deserve more trust (e.g. Gatehub, Bitstamp). One USD.gatehub = 40 USD.payroutes currently. If you include the Payroutes price in your average USD/XRP price, then you get a distorted view.
  13. They suggest: But this is not the case. Which is clear when multiplying the numbers (price X supply): The issue is that Coinmarketcap includes a gateway that issues USD (in this case USD.payroutes) that is valued a lot lower than USD from gateways that deserve more trust (e.g. Gatehub, Bitstamp). One USD.gatehub = 40 USD.payroutes. If you include the Payroutes price in your average USD/XRP price, then you get a distorted view.
  14. You refer to this: It's because Coimarketcap includes a gateway that buys XRP for $0.044228: This gateway is PayRoutes (currently selling 0.33 xrp/usd, Coinmarketcap always lags): But be aware that USD issued by PayRoutes is at lower value than USD issued by Gatehub or Bitstamp (better trusted exchanges): The solution is simple: only take ´trusted´ gateways into account (at this moment in time i.e. Bitstamp, Gatehub) I guess this is all a perfect example that supports the comments made by @RobertHarpool in this topic:
  15. Before ILP Ripple considered to implement ´Boxed payments´, where boxes would hold funds and could be transferred anonymously from wallet to wallet, to handle the issue of privacy. Out of interest: why was this concept ever abandoned? Evolving RL/RCL philosophy? Technical issues? Because it could undermine (iso facilitating) compliance for some users? Or something else?