Jump to content


Bronze Contributor
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. If it could fit on your desk it can't be that old... :P
  2. Nope, but a good indication. So you own old hardware... that does prove what exactly? That's a bit... anticlimacitc. S/He's probably active somewhere else.
  3. I have yet to see any code from this "techie". What's his Github?
  4. I highly doubt it. I'm talking about the university funding initiative by Ripple, while I'm sure Wietse is a smart guy I don't think he qualifies as a university on his own.
  5. Sukrim


    You can trivially double spend. You'll have a very hard time to convince the rest of the network that your version of the truth is the one they should accept too. šŸ˜‰
  6. Maybe? In my experience most people are just underestimating the hardware requirements or overestimating the capabilities of their hosting provider when it comes to sustained disk IO... Anyways, since this stuff is normally my day job and there's nothing published for others to learn from if I log into a server of yours, I wouldn't do this for free. Sorry.
  7. Sukrim

    Ripple sponsoring.

    You sound confused about the difference between a name/brand and an asset. Check registration number 4458993 in the US trademark database.
  8. *cough*freezingenabledbydefault*cough* šŸ˜› On a more serious note, since rippled and RTXP has matured quite nicely over time, it might be beneficial to adopt a more public and formal way to introduce new features and amendments. Maybe something similar to PEPs (Python), EIPs (Ethereum), RFCs (ARPAnet + successors) etc. Neither this forum nor pull requests of already finished features nor the Ripple-internal JIRA instance is a good place for this to happen imho.
  9. You are not giving much information that would help to diagnose or fix any issue.
  10. https://ripple.com/files/GB-2014-06.pdf <-- 2014... and https://developers.ripple.com/list-xrp-as-an-exchange.html#partial-payments also exists. Being too stupid/stingy to contact Ripple or contract someone who knows this stuff when writing your integration or reading documentation and then claiming to be "hacked" is typical for this space I guess.
  11. I can think of a few more features that would be more important than making partial payments harder (which are extremely easy to implement anyways - just look at how much value was moved instead of how much value the transaction tried to move... it is documented for years now how to do that!) but I agree that it is nice that they are still working on stuff.
  12. Hm, I really am not happy with defaults changing - an "AtomicPayment" type transaction that can't be partial might be a better solution.