dik

This one for sure: "I'm long on Bitcoin". Brad only talks rehearsed soundbites. I wish he invited David instead, he speaks his direct thoughts, coming from a brilliant mind.

I think the author is confusing the Swift DLT PoC early last year with "testing Ripple". Here are the results. "DLT not yet ready" was the conclusion (and repeated in that article).

If I am not mistaken, the SEC's recent decision does not declare EOS a security NOW, does it? They only took issue with the ICO phase. EOS is not delisted anywhere because of this, is it? If that is indeed true, then the hidden message in this is: "the worst that can happen to Ripple is a 25M fine".

ask yourself why people ever sell things when inflation means they can get more for it tomorrow.

yes he certainly is

Yes all the shady exchanges in the world will together form a trusted network, with very a simple consensus algorithm about reaching quick global consensus about the order in which up to 1500 transactions per second were received. The trust that is global, is the trust that all validators agree with the outcome of the order of transactions in a single 3 second window. and that order is a trivial issue that nobody cares about, because you cannot spend money that you do not have anyway.

with decentralized digital assets, trust is global, and the system is permissionless. two very important conditions for an entirely new class of autonomous applications that run on the internet, and are also accessible by the 1.7 billion adults that do not have access to a bank account.

If it were that simple, Bitcoin would also be a security.

I think that eventually, digital assets will be used by anyone that wants real-time transactions over the Internet of small amounts and low costs, globally. I also think eventually small transactions will replace large transactions. Money will move in small packets, in the opposite direction of the services that are provided. For software to be able to handle money as truly data, it can't have a counter party, as the counterparty introduces a "well it depends". So anyone who has assets in a silo'd network, will have to convert those assets to universal digital asset, in order to participate in the global IoV, either knowingly or unknowingly (as part of an automated process). So question remains: ok, digital assets will be the liquid between payment networks, but why XRP? Answer to that it that it is the cheapest, has the best reach into all markets, the best liquidity, provides 3 second transaction finality, and is the most energy efficient. I don't believe the success of XRP solely depends on the success of xRapid. It depends on whether indeed my assumption is right that we absolutely need decentralized digital assets for the next version of the web. If that is true, the digital asset with the lowest friction will win by definition. As far as I can see, that is XRP.

Assuming network A and B, and network A member Bob needs to pay network B member Alice money. Bob buys XRP for network A dollars, sends XRP to (the jurisdiction of) Alice who then sells XRP for network B dollars. Or possibly with agent X in between, who takes care of the exchange and transport part, so that neither Bob or Alice ever have to deal with anything than their local network currency. This requires liquidity of dollar A / XRP and dollar B / XRP. This depends on the market demand of members of A and B transacting together. Remember: in the digital space there is not (yet, and possbily never) "a single dollar": digital dollars are not fungible. There is only a promise by a bank to pay you a dollar. One banks' promise is not simply swappable 1:1 with another banks promise. In fact: none of the banks actually have the dollars they've promised to people, and some banks are in worse state in that aspect than others. That is where assets that do not have a counter party come into play. One XRP in jurisdiction A is guaranteed 1:1 swappable with one XRP in jurisdiction B.

It may be a competitor for RippleNet, but not for XRP (which, as a universal digital asset, does not depend on ILP to bridge networks).

No court has ruled on bananas being securities, yet they are sold as bananas everywhere. Is that misleading too?

Does this network create a level playing field and advance interoperabitliy between payment networks? Yes? good, it will enable deflationary native digital asset XRP to compete with inflationary (unbacked fractional reserve) USD IOU's. No? Then not a competitor but another walled garden that needs to be bridged to connect to other walled gardens. XRP is being positioned to best cross the bridges.

My point is that the majority of talented content creators are currently creating their content for free, while facebook, twitter etc are earning all the revenue from their work. THEY will switch to a platform where they are being paid for their talent, once it becomes simple to route payments directly from reader to author. Leaving advertising platforms with only garbage. Then you will switch too.

You must have spend at least 15 minutes writing that article. How much revenue did that create for you? Zero. You may not care. Other talented writers will. You are being robbed now. Web payments will change that completely. The net result is that you will be paying LESS for better content.