Jump to content

kuyu

Member
  • Content Count

    541
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by kuyu

  1. We are mustering the Legions even as I type this and we are coming for your lands.
  2. Just to clarify that I refer to OMG as it is close to the original Ripple vision. Not because it is or is not better than anything else. I have my opinions but that wasn't the point of my comment.
  3. Currency agnosticism and interoperability are properties which arise from how the nuts and bolts fit together. In that sense, some alternative frameworks exist. A notable one would be the Omisego project.
  4. dis-intermediated = without (Fin Inst.) intermediates i.e. the people in between, the 3rd parties (sometimes 4th and more) which facilitate transactions and add cost. without intermediates = less business for Ripple on their current model Hope that sums it up
  5. How is it FUD. Ripple repeatedly outline those very same things as their competitive advantages. They focus on them, as they are the most salient advantages and the immediately realizable ones. If they did lose these advantages, that is a serious issue. So yes, time is fleeting. That is not FUD. That is a fact of life.
  6. Ripple is heading the other way. Ripple and OmiseGo are effectively two sharply opposed approaches. You can review how each one proposes to solve issues of liquidity as well as how they pitch their solutions. It's not Stellar that is the anti-Ripple, it's OmiseGo. In fact, OMG as a concept is very much akin to the original Ripple vision, pre-pivot. p.s. methinks you posted this in the wrong section. Heads up for next time. Thanks for link.
  7. thank you ! nice post and info on that.
  8. I don't see how they could identify it as a security. Not in the traditional sense. But keep in mind we are breaking into new pastures with crypto, so can't rule anything out at this moment. Change comes for everything, even regulation.
  9. Ok just an interjection. Omisego is quite similar to the original Ripple vision. See if that helps see the same or proximal issues under a different lens.
  10. Surprising how little of this is done sometimes. Edit: Surprising It's worrying how little of this is done sometimes.
  11. Yes I understand but I still disagree. Of course, like I mentioned previously, this is not a black and white issue. Still, I think I add value by making these arguments as I still don't see the connection of some of the previous comments to reality. Even Ripple's marketing material seems to contradict the logic behind them. So some more food for thought and probably end it here. No point becoming bothersome plus I wanna look into other threads as well If there is such a way to get many many people into a system that is exhangeing value in a given currency (liquidity) then you’ll increase that liquidity and make it easier to get in and out of a given currency. - Which Ripple solution does this for many people? Lack if liquidity (which is also a technological issue) is a major problem. - Ripple wants to solve this issue for intermediaries. Not individuals. Yes, to some extent some capital can be freed but there is generally an overestimation in some of these threads, regarding the impact on the everyday life of a citizen. Those savings are far more likely to manifest as dividends and bonuses and investments back into operations, than any grand benevolent financial inclusivity scheme. Here's a counter example greater automation = greater global and evenly shared financial prosperity ? Actually no. Primarily we only see the top tier wealthy getting wealthier and corporate tax evading coffers and/or treasuries growing. Liquidity had given the United States power and authority since after World War II. Liquidity is key. I would argue that the US is has acquired those things, through the number and size of their weapons and the fact that they spend the most (by an obscene amount) on defense, as compared to any other nation. I think given the circumstances, this argument explains more than the argument of liquidity. Military US might is partly if not mostly responsible for the enduring power of the dollar. Then follow American industry and the acquisition of intellectual capital, which is what I admire the US most for.
  12. Ok. We will not agree anytime soon. Here's the link from Ripple's site on how they define and approach the "issue" of liquidity. https://ripple.com/insights/liquidity-explained/
  13. So should I understand this as meaning: liquidity = "better banking and investing opportunities for the unbanked" ?
  14. The financial infrastructure that Ripple is building - their pitch is that they can decrease operational costs to financial service providers. I imagine you have already seen presentations, read the documents etc. There is nothing there about allowing any unbanked ppl to do anything. That was in the previous Ripple iteration, p2p, which I believe was called Opencoin. Dressing something with the words "unbanked" doesn't detract from Ripple's transformed approach to the market. Clearly much more than just wording has changed at Ripple HQ. Today, the only argument that you could reliably make, is that due to a decrease of operational costs for financial service providers, somehow there would be a manifested goodwill or drive to expand financial exclusivity for the unbanked. That is not an argument devoid of logic, it makes sense. I just don't agree with it, because of how much I disagree with the scale of inter-mediation and incentives involved. You take a leap of faith to believe all that you say is true. I take a leap of faith, to believe that p2p is the better way forward and in the process, liquidity as an issue could also be solved.
  15. To be honest, I admit I am definitely missing the point as there is a conflict in your argument. Remittance - financial inclusivity. Is there overlap ? Of course. But I maintain that the unbankeds' number 1 issue is financial inclusivity and has nothing to do with liquidity. Potentially, once out of their destitute and/or unconnected situation, they may increase demand for remittance services. But creating a remittance service, Walmart or otherwise, does not bring them out of their current situation.
  16. I am being completely serious. Taking on humorous or condescending tones does not help your argument. Only facts would. Since you're failing on facts, I will keep my argument. Besides, I am sharing an opinion having in mind our common interest. Hence I am trying to add value to this conversation. You don't have to agree - it should be clear by now that we are not dealing with black and white issues.
  17. which should also give you an idea on the probabilities involved.
  18. Like i said, the problem of the unbanked, is not a problem of liquidity. Please stop throwing the buzzwords around. https://ripple.com/insights/news/ripple-the-gates-foundation-team-up-to-level-the-economic-playing-field-for-the-poor/
  19. There is no liquidity problem for the unbanked ..... there is no such thing to solve. And Ripple does not have a wallet, nor supports the development of one.......
  20. Όσοι απο εσάς έχεται αγοράσει απο πλατφόρμες CFD, δέν έχεται αγοράσει κρυπτονόμισμα. Αγοράσατε CFDs, contracts for difference - τιμη πάει πάνω? Κερδίζεται την διαφορά. Τιμή πάει κάτω? Χάνετε την διαφορά. Δεν έχεται wallets, ούτε XRP. Καλο κακο? Εσείς αποφασίζεται.
  21. Δεν αγορασες κρυπτονομισμα. Αν δεν κανω λαθος, αγορασες derivative. Ουσιαστικα συμβολαιο που παιζει πανω στη διαφορα τιμης.... λογικα δεν εχεις wallet
  22. 42:23 ... the race is on. It will soon become even more obvious.
×
×
  • Create New...