Jump to content

jag216

Bronze Member
  • Content Count

    818
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About jag216

  • Rank
    Advanced

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. What about fake accounts, KYC and AML? I cannot wait to see the faces of all the advertisers who were quoted rates on expected traffic and active user counts when those fake accounts and robo accounts get culled and we get to see the real numbers of human users eligible to participate in the facebookcoin ecosystem.
  2. This is clearly a place where Ripple wants to shine as production ready - they are watching the validators being bought by other major payment networks and are keenly aware that facebook is unlikely to have a developed product of their own until 2020 - while Ripple tech works, has a streamlined implementation process now, saves money, keeps customers happy potentially and is production-ready now. That's the message I got from the latest Brad Garlinghouse interview on the topic. I think facebook's announcements and the variety of $10million contributors to the libra project really lit a fire under the stack of partners in pilot phase or otherwise sitting on the fence regarding active participation in RippleNet - and if they can be offered incentives to run validators and decentralize the XRPL even more, so much the better. Moneygram is the first domino to fall of many, and facebook pushing the time envelope is just the nudge needed to set RippleNet partnerships in motion. Very exciting times.
  3. I do not see the issues with the messages I receiving. Sure you are winning, right? God bless you.
  4. https://www.quora.com/If-Ripple-gets-bought-by-SWIFT-are-all-my-XRP-coins-worth-nothing?ch=10&share=7fa8a2cd&srid=uFeq I thought this answer was interesting because it lays out the brass tacks fee structure and disadvantages of SWIFT prior to gpi, while also demonstrating the interesting complexities of banks voting with their feet against an entity that they get dividends from proportional to their utilization of the product.
  5. So while I was googling around for crypto seizure auctions, I came across this project which seems to currently be flying under the radar but also seems to address a lot of valid points developing in the cryptocurrency space. 10,000,000 initial supply, 2,000,000 in initial reserve for business. 8,000,000 to be sold over a 7 days period via dutch auction. New MET minted daily ad infinitum, at the rate that is the greater of (i) 2,880 MET per day, or (ii) an annual rate equal to 2.0000% of the then-outstanding supply per year. The coin will initially fund on ETH but is supposed to be able to traverse chains - it is aiming to be a highly liquid functioning currency, rather than a store of value. Tapscott and a former CFTC chair are on the advisory board. https://metronome.io/#team-content Thoughts? I don't think this will compete terribly well with ILP in terms of facilitating cross-chain settlement but I like some of the cultural challenges they are addressing. Particularly when there seems to be a developing battles between economic schools in the fixed supply/deflationary/inflationary supply debate. The real answer is probably that we need diverse economic models for various currencies to allow for a more healthy fintech landscape.
  6. Banking as an institution disappears with hardware adoption of crypto payments. When I buy a home router and go to the admin and allow an open port and get to choose UDP/TCP/ILP and can load crypto onto my tv, electricity meter, gas meter on hardware, and hardware on my network is able to stream income that I have received on my phone for the hours I've worked that day, universal income/dividend, etc. There is no need for banking as a conventional product for the masses. There are specialized financial services, yes... But banking in a traditional custodial sense goes the way of the bank teller and branch offices (which are already getting phased out at a surprising pace). Bank stablecoins are a stopgap solution the banks are using to maintain the value of their own use case. XRP will dominate the network of networks and give all of the different IoT subnets of value their wings. Think mojoloop. We'll use Samsungcoin and HBOcoin and USDC and WalmartCoin while engaging different proprietery networks of value but XRP and others will work behind the scenes allowing that value to hop to whatever arrangements our lives require. Access to the ILP-driven internet of value will be essential for stablecoin utility, because no single entity running such a closed loop can provide every service to everyone.
  7. Thought this would be an interesting opinion to contribute to the role of FUD and price correlation from a data science perspective: https://github.com/Mooseburger1/Springboard-Data-Science-Immersive/blob/master/Capstone 1 Project/Report/Capstone 1 Report.pdf
  8. Yes, I believe this is the case - it is not merely pegged to the dollar, but pegged to dollars on account at JPM.
  9. The problem with fiat based stablecoins is that the debt driving the underlying fundamentals is a variable volume instrument with ranging volatility. Debt creates the backing. The entire problem with the 2008 crisis was not over borrowing. The borrower generally is willing to borrow whatever the banks will offer. The banks must put proper risk management in place. And since this doesn't always happen, external third parties have to regulate. What I see being a problem with stablecoins is that in such a case where the underlying debts go bad, there is a cascading effect on the economy that can be immediately engaged. A bail in could happen to everyone's stablecoin wallet centrally in order to compensate for bad debt and the money attached to it. Rather than absorb the debt (or go to prison) for poor risk management and assuming responsibility for the introduction of toxic assets backing the system, banks can use stablecoin wallets to socialize the bad debt while centralizing profits. It's the same game of pong on a PS4. But it is also the same thing with crypto bought via credit card money, or fiat denominated loans based on crypto. Despite being transparent, the derivatives based in debt based transactions and backed by crypto provide just as big of a threat as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations did on housing prices. In the end it is better to have a house than a mortgage backed security or cash. Folks who understand finance will always hold crypto assets while they may use stablecoins in daily commerce. Stablecoins are as reliable as fiat as store of value - though even the spin of calling them stable suggests otherwise.
  10. If you are a true SHTF believer, you've got to look to headlines and consider currency events and war events globally. We are always riding seesaws when we trade, and when you consider how rare stability is, and the heavy hands required, you can assume manipulation in these markets 90% of the time while volumes and overall market cap is this low. The parabolic shifts that we crave are caused by sharp external forces. Heavy doses of greed or fear or both. I don't know why people ignore the potential social causes behind the massive movement to crypto from South Korea during the last bull cycle - check the headlines, because folks were scared to death of war on the peninsula and I think a lot of folks were worried about a currency event being needed to pay for war and/or needing a way to quickly get funds out of local fiat if people needed to leave the country. Here we are again with testing in NK engaged. There is some indication of international unwinding of us debt, while also a bit of positive movement into t-bills on the us side. This could contribute to a dollar flush event and I have plenty of reason to speculate that there will eventually be a flippening between crypto and national bonds. This is what I think the global banking system is gearing up for, and I would be hesitant to cash out too early into fiat prior to knowing how much government debt is being unloaded. It would be a convenient transfer of wealth to power if, in a coordinated effort, a bull run was triggered with bond revenues sold at secret auction and fueled by government crypto purchases - leaving us as millionaires in fiat and triggering hyperinflation while governments hold all the digital assets. What a purge of hypocrisy in crypto that would be! Just a reminder that price in fiat is not what the cryptocurrency ethos is all about. Price and value are not the same. I don't think the social and political value of digital asset networks should be understated.
  11. Something cannot be a security and a currency at the same time. A digital currency without an active operating utility network is, effectively, a currency without an actual country backing it up. Until that point all anyone has to go on is the promise of a company telling you there's a home country for a currency being built - it's coming soon but is not here yet. Until there is a standing stable ecosystem for utility and trade a digital asset remains a security. As for the escrow, I agree with the assessment SPQR has come up with which is that there is nothing to stop Ripple from selling their escrow in advance through negotiated futures contracts and that much of it has already been reserved in this way at a lucrative price. The escrow then provides custodial security until Polysign is fully operational. Has nothing whatsoever to do with the SEC who are waiting for network effects to reach an as yet undetermined threshold before declaring it as much a currency as BTC or ETH. My guess is that it will take a few more corridor announcements before that happens, but perhaps not many more if they carry significant volumes.
  12. Sorry I didn't get notifications on the thread but really appreciate the inventive nature of the technology and your thoughts on how the tech can be reshaped to address exceptional circumstances.
  13. Are they important? I necrod a thread (sorry) but then found a link to one video that caused a mild ruckus. This was inspired by a brief segment in the CKJ presentation where Bob did a brief segwe and broke down the relationship between satoshis and drops. Will this become more relevant as micropayments make up a larger part of the volume if the price of a whole XRP increases? Are XRP undervalued when compared to BTC given the location of the decimal place? Or is the reach and network of BTC such that it outpaces XRP and the value factor is justified as is? I'll step away from the hornets nest now - but I'd ask Bob how he thinks about the impact divisibility has on overall whole price - and if the dominance of public perception of owning a "whole amount" of something holds back pricing - because there's just "so many" xrp.
×
×
  • Create New...