Xi195

Member
  • Content count

    409
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5
  1. I have no issue with the research. It doesn't seem to be clear that this issue was largely established in prior research but quite frankly i would be happy if Monero was not as anonymous as was originally thought. I do disagree with the way Zcash poured fuel on the fire with Zooko's tweet. It feeds the narrative that this is a hit piece and dilutes the valid message of the research.
  2. This is a very low blow for Zooko to be positing this. As a Zcash holder this is very disappointing. There was already some valid criticism about the author's ties to Zcash and his unwillingness to work with Monero on the paper (see Monero comment at the bottom of this article: https://cointelegraph.com/news/monero-transactions-history-can-be-revealed-and-exposed-research). Monero itself reported these linking capabilities two years ago. This is not news. Not to mention Zooko links to a website that only discusses anonymity in blocks up till Jan 31, 2017. Monero has since hard forked specifically to increase privacy. The fact there is even a website called monerolink.com to specifically spread poorly contextualized information regarding the competition seems desperate. The fact that the CEO of a major crypto company and competitor would stoop so low as to tweet it seems nearly inconceivable. This may cause me to sell as I'm extremely skeptical about the future of an organization lead by an individual making such poor decisions. Rings of snarky desperation...that was double crypto pun.
  3. Any indication of volume on the charts? I believe someone in the past commented that volume was very low.
  4. I think all of this could be worked out if there were sufficient interest in the topic which does not seem to be the case so far. I do think integrating the unique features of Ripple such as multisig and escrow would be important. I'm not sure who segrax is (are you here somewhere?), but he his wallet includes functionality for both and seems to be well maintained: https://github.com/segrax/xrp-wallet Considering the number of open source wallets I would assume the technical resources are available, but they have not been focused. That was really the purpose of this topic. To see if we could generate interest in focusing these efforts. If there's interest, we can move on to finding consensus on #2. Adding https://github.com/karl-os/XRP-CHAT-WALLET/releases
  5. Thanks for your time and thorough post @cmbartley. I'm still very skeptical of the decentralized storage model. I don't think the average person wants/cares to share their excess hard drive space. The implications and risks of such sharing is not immediately understandable to the average person. It's not like renting your apartment out on Airbnb where the risks are immediately apparent, the service comes with insurance, and the reward is arguably more proportional to the risk. That being said, if a decentralized storage provider can provide better service (faster, more secure) at a cheaper price, the concept will likely succeed.
  6. According to JoelKatz: You can read his full comment on page 3 of this topic (towards the bottom). Agreed. I think there were a number of factors and this was one of them. If that's the case, the idea of a lockup is partly priced in to XRP's current price. It would've been awkward if Miguel mentioned his own Epicenter interview report in the Q1 Report, but I think that was another contributing factor.
  7. One positive to these astronomical predictions is the price range seems to keep going higher and higher over time. I guess that's a good thing.
  8. This makes sense, but is this true for a desktop client? I guess since JavaScript always runs in the browser, it is? It looks like Karlos has a desktop client for OS X, Windows, and Linux here:https://github.com/karl-os/XRP-CHAT-WALLET/releases You are always very critical from a security perspective. Any contribution you can make would be an asset as you seem to have critical questions whether the project is C# or not.
  9. Thanks for chiming in @Dennis. Maybe the BitGo wallet will fill this need? Any thoughts? I have revised deliverable #1 above accordingly. I would feel plenty safe if a handful of the individuals I tagged above signed off on it. While open source !== secure, a well established open-source product is preferable to a private and closed alternative in my opinion (and I believe many others).
  10. I don't think so. Though locking up XRP might ease distribution concerns, it doesn't limit regulatory risks in any way.
  11. This is a continuation of @tomxcs' topic here:https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/3735-community-initiatives-for-ripple-and-xrp/#comment-37659 INTRODUCTION: Wallets are a foundational component to cryptocurrency as users require a secure method for storing them. I'm slightly ashamed to admit that I've never used one for XRP despite having held XRP since late 2014. A typical response to a new member typically goes something like this; "Rippex is a popular choice, but I can't confirm that personally". Non-techinical individuals like myself are therefore subject to two alternatives. 1. Trust that your XRP is safe on an exchange 2. Trust that the wallet/client you're using isn't malicious. This results in barriers to entry, limiting the rate at which Ripple and XRP are adopted. To resolve this I would like to propose... ABSTRACT: Consolidate the technical efforts of this community to produce an XRP Community Audited, Sourced, and Endorsed, Open-Source Wallet (dare we call it XCASE?) INITIAL DELIVERABLES: Determine if there is a good idea (a worthy goal for this topic, please chime in). Does the closed-source BitGo wallet coming out soon eliminate a need for an open-source alternative? Any thoughts @cmbartley @Malloy @Dizer @Graine @lucky @kanaas @tomb @rippleric @papa @Apollo @Hodor @namini or anyone else? Identify technical individuals or organizations willing to 1. audit the code 2. sign off on it's security 3. update as required Tagging in potential individuals here: @T8493 @Professor Hantzen @xtrapower @jn_r @tulo @ripplerm @jatchili@karlos @yxxyun @Duke67 Tagging in potential organizations here: @Warbler @Rippex @RafOlP@enej @gregor @gatehub Ripple Employees (are there limitations that prevent individual contribution?): @JoelKatz @nikb @mDuo13 @shekenahglory @Tim @warpaul If I missed someone, please tag below and I will add. Assuming #1 is cleared and sufficient hands are raised for #2... Schedule an initial meeting to: Develop management structure Identify an existing wallet to utilize as the codebase Determine a preferred communication platform Schedule regular community conference calls/online meet ups to execute I look forward to this topic being labeled <SUCCESS> by @Mercury @tomxcs or @karlos!
  12. One more... "Decentralization" under the heading Q2 2017? It may be closer to Easter, but it feels like XRP Christmas. When this happens and Ripple communicates it thoroughly (as they did with the 1000txs/sec) I believe it will be a very big deal.
  13. I'm with you. An easter egg for the discerning. The perfect week for it too. 🐣 This seems to be another which suggests SOON may be here this quarter: After all you have to have a plan on how to you intend to use them before you can lock them up.
  14. This paragraph in particular is a beauty: "We’ve put our ear to the ground and have been listening to important feedback from the XRP community. This includes the need for greater visibility and transparency into Ripple’s vision, strategic use cases for XRP, and plans to increase liquidity and decentralization. To that end, we plan to increase our communications cadence to address this feedback. We also look forward to having a large presence at Consensus in New York in May." 👏👏👏 Round of applause to @miguel & co. @Dizer This sounds like a reference to the lock up: "In addition, you may want to watch out for specific announcements in Q2 regarding potential ways to use RCL’s new Escrow feature,"