Search the Community

Hello I have a question it is better to mint my FXRP with 2.4x collateral or 3x ?

CanaryX airdrop on songbird network, here’s there Twitter (@CanaryXtoken) https://twitter.com/canaryxtoken?s=21 since a lot of XRP holders have songbird figured I’d post this here. Cheers and DYOR! https://t.me/CanaryX_Airdrop_Bot ⬆️link to steps for airdrop

Stage 1: Looking to create a smart contract for my XRPL NFT marketplace and integration of XUMM wallet. Stage 2: creating smart contract for land based NFT game I am developing and integration into XRPL. Hard to find developers they all seem busy or work with foundation. Looking for freelancers who may also be interested in becoming part of the development team. The goal is to get the marketplace up and running since it is the easiest part of the project. The game will also need a marketplace so that can be tied in later. Once the marketplace is ready I will begin minting the NFTs for my land based game. Serious project so message me of you have the experience. I know we don't have Turing complete smart contracts but I believe I can get a marketplace working with a webapp that can handle minting/issuance and payment using XRPL.

These infographics show high-level overview of the Spark ecosystem (Flare Network). F-Assets agents Flare Time Series Oracle (FTSO) Data providers dApps (Flare Finance) How to earn yield View infographics: https://www.stedas.hr/flare-network-spark-ecosystem.html

Please take this with a small pinch of salt. It's work in progress so I haven't thought it all the way through 100%. I'd like to call upon some old pals who are smarter than me: @KarmaCoverage @tulo @kanaas @protechtor @cmbartley @baggy23 @yxxyun @Mercury @mars75 @Graine @Global @jn_r @brianwalden @Parabellum etc, to help me thrash this out and debunk/critique as necessary. –––––––––––––––––––––––––––– x-Assets Synthetic, XRP-collateralized, price-pegged digital assets. Collateral could be 1.5:1, 2:1, 3:1 as necessary. Based on the XRP Ledger Stablecoin Proposal by David Schwartz: xUSD xEUR xXAU xXAG xBTC xLTC xMXN xQQQ xAPPL xTSLA xWTI (etc) Assets inside exchange orderbooks are always "synthetic" or IOUs of some sort because on-ledger exchanges (even XRPL's DEX) cannot handle such immense trading volumes. The exchanges hold "real" assets in the back end (either bought "on demand" or most likely in advance bought at bulk or at their own risk), so when you want to cash out you convert the (for example) BTC "IOU" to BTC. Instead of exchanges holding multiple real assets, what if some exchanges only held a quantity of XRP (over-collateralized, say 200%) that's required to buy back those assets upon cashing out? -- @KarmaCoverage rightly mentioned (below) that ILP ledgers can do this; @tulo made a great thread back in 2017 re: ILP & multihop -- The problem is that there are any given number of assets with particular quirks e.g. bitcoin and its slow transaction time. Or some niche digital gold ledger somewhere. So exchanges still have to buy/hold the actual asset "somewhere" to make the withdrawal. But stablecoins prove that synthetics can work. Just look at USDT (aka Tether). What it allows is for better rebalancing and liquidity between exchanges. Users can port USDT to any supporting exchange and hold. Tether acts as a treasury or rebalancing mechanism. But it's still slow and requires trusting the Tether treasurers! Let's assume exchanges support an x-Asset standard instead: xUSD, xMXN to start. Instead of e.g. using ODL for remittance (where we know Ripple have had rebalancing issues) the usual way – deposit to USD exchange (slow), swap to XRP (fee), withdrawal of XRP to MXN exchange (slow, possible fee) and another conversion from XRP to MXN (fee) then withdraw to MXN bank (slow, fee?) – this time a market maker (and/or collateral provider/issuer of some sort) holds only XRP and uses the XRPL's pegged stablecoin feature to create a synthetic 200% backed xUSD / xMXN on the XRP ledger. These synthetics move in 3 sec just like XRP, because they are XRP! But remember, these also behave like "real" USD or MXN for holders thanks to price oracles (perhaps supplied by Flare, Tezos, Chainlink?) so that they always guarantee the same market value upon redemption. That price volatility risk is managed profitably by the issuers (and market makers?). Since the exchanges support x-Assets directly, the market makers (MMs) can quote for a remittance flow from e.g. USD->MXN and since we know the XRP value of both USD and MXN, we can also calculate this in XRP. So all the MM is doing is moving XRP from the xUSD to the xMXN (or vice versa). Or, XRP is just rebalancing instantly from one "pot" to another, so to speak. Going from xUSD to xMXN is really just an XRP tradeoff in a collateral pool. Side note: this might be what parts of Bob Way's patents were alluding to (or not). I believe (but I'm not 100% sure) this gets rid of at least one of the two fees that's been a problem for ODL on traditional exchanges where you have to go e.g. from Kraken (USA, fees) to Bitso (MXN, fees) and cannot also guarantee their withdrawals will be timely. So instead, we're just moving XRP direct and only incurr the XRPL fee plus whatever the MM quotes. Now notice in the bottom graphics that I've put examples of various synthetics trading with one another without XRP, which is a weird notion. E.g. xXAG (silver) & xQQQ (NASDAQ). But remember, these are all just XRP anyway. But I think it's possible. They are really just "pots" being refilled like water flowing from one to another on-demand. The water is XRP. Just for fun really. Also notice one can get a total calculation of volume (in XRP, of course) for the entire orderbook slot. So rebalancing is in theory very easy to calculate here to top-up one-way flows. Remittance/ODL? The main point though, is how a remittance flow would work through this system vs ODL. How the rebalancing gets done. Because now it's just a matter of moving XRP from pot to pot. However, at some point the x-Asset has to hit a real bank account. Unless of course... banks are part of the "pool" in some way. But my brain can't play out all the pieces and I start getting a headache and thinking... maybe this is all total crap?! We know under David's proposal that x-Asset issuers will get rewarded for taking over other positions and providing excess collateral to guarantee redemptions and so on. So the game theory works for this part and provides a sort of long-fabled liquidity incentive (Miguel?!) in the meantime (possibly related to Bob Way's automated, scalable and non-partisan mechanism for allocating XRP on the DEX). Questions/problems Anyway my questions to you guys, are: 1/ How and by whom does this rebalancing take place when new money comes into exchanges e.g. speculators/traders/retail? Who accounts for the extra flows? 2/ What happens at the point of withdrawal to a real bank account? Is that actually faster than just having regular exchanges, or the same? 3/ What if the Banks themselves simply hold and rebalance x-Assets (xPool?) until they need to withdraw in bulk? 4/ What if consumer-end apps and pseudo-banks e.g. Uphold, Gatehub, Coinbase, even Paypal/Revolut, started accepting an x-Asset type standard? 5/ Could x-Asset rebalancing between exchanges/pools be achieved in an automated fashion by an XRPL native AI/monitoring system? 6/ Is this a useful implementation for Offer Auto-Bridging? @nikb 7/ Is this really a legit thought experiment?! Am I wrong or completely bonkers?! PLEASE DON'T ROAST ME ALIVE!!! . . –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– . . REFERENCE MATERIAL (reading to do if this is all new):

https://medium.com/poloniex/new-poloniex-listing-spark-iou-xflr-94e87cacb22d Trading pair https://poloniex.com/exchange/usdt_xflr

Hello, So I have read that "Bittrex Global" will be supporting the Flare Airdrop however I am unsure if this is different for US customers who only have access to US exchange. Thoughts?

I thought I'd publish my own method for claiming your Sparks on the new Flare Network. Browser based. No app or Node.js required. All you need is your 'XRP Public Address', your 'XRP Secret/Seed', your 'ETH Public Address' and a Google Chrome browser. See here: https://github.com/SimpleXRPTools/SimpleXRPTools REMINDER: Don't use your XRP secret/seed on an online PC or device. Use an offline, "air-gapped" PC or device. Thanks to Wietse Wind for supplying the requirements . See here: https://coil.com/p/wietse/Prepare-for-claiming-your-Spark-token-Flare-Networks-a-tool-for-XUMM-XRPToolkit/NkXJQUqpi

For developers working on the XRPL I wanted to share an interesting project that started some months ago running on the ethereum blockchain and that one can figure it could be a vary valuable concept to transpose to the XRP ledger. The project’s name is vether (https://vetherasset.org/) “Vether is designed to be a store-of-value with properties of strict scarcity, unforgeable costliness and a fixed emission schedule. Vether mimics characteristics of Bitcoin, where miners compete to expend capital to acquire newly-minted coins and chase ever-decreasing margins. Instead of expending capital, Vether participants compete to purchase it by destroying capital on-chain. As a result, all units of Vether are acquired at-cost and by anyone. This mechanism is called Proof-of-Value.” There is a daily emission of vether (currently at only 2080 coins) that participants acquire them by burning ethereum (so deflating the circulating ethereum in existence). Daily burn acquisition is fair because its emission of value is pooled out of the number of participants for that day (e.g. if you burn 1 eth, and you are the single participant, you receive all its 2080 vether for that day; however if 10 participants with 1 eth each enter (burn them), you receive 10% of that pool [i.e. 208 vether]). A day is 23hours and 30min and halving occurs every 244 days. The first halving is expected for 5 January 2021. The “secret” to acquire vether is continuously daily burning of 1 to 2eth, because the protocol decreases proportionally with potential vether if one decides to burn 5 to 10 eth in one go. In other words, to obtain vether’s daily emission, burning 5 eth in one go is not the same as burning 5x one single ethereum. What if something along the lines could be developed into the XRPledger? So (1) burn XRP to mint this daily coin, but with another add-on (2) part of the proceedings for the “burning” instead of being burnt are sent to an escrow to fund XRP validators? So something like 80% of XRP directly burnt and 20% to pay XRP validators. After some days and weeks of daily emission of this new “burnt”-derived XRP (Let us call it bXRP for now), participants either wait for daily emission of burning (to acquire bXRP) or decide to trade (buy) the existing (circulating) ones out of the XRP DEX (bXRP/XRP). In other words, participants that already acquired burnt (daily) XRP from previous days can trade them (sell) for XRP. The emission in vether is scheduled to run for 10 years. What advantages would this new “burnt”-derived XRP be good for? First, bXRP could be a store of value coin (because it is in low and with fixed supply; maybe 1 million coins, 21 million coins?) minted at cost by burning XRP. Second, deflating further the supply of circulating XRP because it is needed to acquire bXRP. Ok long-term potencial of bXRP, into defi projects. The above example of vether is to sub-serve a new upcoming Defi project called Vader. Vader Pools (the new Defi) 1 Vether Burned = 1 Vader (you need to then burn vether to obtain Vader; so one burns initially ethereum to obtain vether, and then vether supply is burnt to obtain Vader) “VADER is a new form of liquidity protocol that seeks to be self-serving. It uses its own liquidity and awareness of asset purchasing power to support virtual assets, as well as lending and derivatives. It has a fair and transparent liquidity incentive strategy to maximise the depth of liquidity pools and the creation of virtual assets. It uses a liquidity-sensitive fee to ensure safe and sustainable creation of debt.” In many ways, such a proposal would be similar to the current Flare network, for those current familiar with the process (but with a few [burning] differences: a) XRP collateral served to obtain FXRP to acquire spark. b) Ethereum burnt to obtain vether, and vether burnt to acquire Vader. I think of such a minted/burnt at cost XRP-derived coin could (1) enhance the decentralization of the XRP ledger (stimulation new/ongoing XRP validators by funding), (2) provide interoperability with other XRP networks (like Flare networks; e.g. directly trading bXRP with spark or burn bXRP to obtain spark) [maybe have some people from Flare looking into this forum post?]), (3) reduce the supply of XRP further, (4) in the process increasing XRP liquidity with this burnt-at-cost model to obtain bXRP which is traded in the XRP DEX (and other exchanges) and (5) in the process create a real store of value with much lower supply and much better initial distribution model of a token than XRP ever had since its inception. For developers operating the XRP ledger, researching and looking out for potential positive projects, maybe such potential is worth brainstorming about? Vether’s white paper (3 pages long and reads well; highly advisable to read): https://vetherasset.org/whitepaper Vader’s white paper is currently hidden; this is because it was recently carbon copied by another project (the Spartan Project) that recently launched in the binance chain. Since then the white paper draft is offline (but maybe you can get ideas of Vader from the copied Spartan protocol https://medium.com/spartanprotocol/announcing-the-spartan-protocol-e15af93a8a8f) Cheers.

Hello I am trying to prepare for the flare fork with my xrp and nano. I created a MEW and did all the steps on XRPtoolkit, I got my "message key" but when I go to add that to account properties on XRPtoolkit, it says "invalid hash" meaning I cant complete it. Been goolging and trying for over 3 hours. Does anyone know what this message means or how to fix it? I have DMed the staff on Twitter but really would like to fix this

It hasn't been discussed much but I wanted to explore some of the Flare architecture because it creates a fascinating head-to-head battle with ETH. First, here's my understanding of Flare, summarised by @jn_r That's what I thought as well after reading the 2 whitepapers. They've used a hybrid model similar to something proposed by Emin Gun Sirer to "help" ETH. Emin is Professor at Cornell and CEO for AVA Labs which is developing Avalanche. Ethereans point-blank refused this idea, considering his suggestion a trojan horse to undermine ETH development roadmap. They were right to be worried of course because Avalanche has already overtaken ETH 2.0 which looks like it's going to be stuck in a 2017 PoS and sharding models that failed to impress across a range of other cryptocurrencies. It's taken Consensys, Joe and Vitalik so long to get their act together (they've been aware of ETH scalability problems for over 4 years now) that community developers have started leaving ETH for other projects that make easy money. I think the explosion of DeFi projects is part of that urgency although they've all run into the same walls that Cryptokitties did. Gas prices and settlement bottlenecks. That's not accounting for the monumental risks of moving the entire ETH platform, users and wallets across to ETH 2.0. If you take a look at the roadmap, the plan is to maintain 2 separate chains in parallel as phases roll out. And you can only move ETH in one direction to the new PoS platform, praying that funds are #safu. Holy cow - what a mess this will be. But hella fun to watch from the sidelines. Which brings us to Flare. The smart folk at Flare (probably under the coaxing/supervision of the smart folk at Ripple) started with a clean slate and have taken the best of all worlds. I'm not convinced about the use of EVM which is a dog's breakfast of a programming language and will need to be updated/replaced eventually. I suspect Flare used EVM as a competitive play for portability, market share and developer mind-share (a long standing problem for XRPL). Even better is how they kept everything simple. The benefit today is that Flare will be able to port most of ETH's smart contracts and (eventually) allow users to settle in ETH. At the outset, settlement can only go between Flare to XRP with other coins to follow but that's fine because we'll be able to compare and contrast. This thing is big. Real big. If DeFi projects take off in any meaningful way on Flare, taking advantage of XRP's liquidity, settlement speed and lack of bottlenecks, we may well witness one of the biggest shifts in crypto ever witnessed. It's a big IF but the barriers of entry to the Flare network will be low so it's "level playing field" and all that good stuff. It's incredibly exciting news for me personally as a lawyer who's waited for smart contract functionality for the XRPL but I'm holding off getting too excited after the Codius let-downs. All said, the ease of replicating EVM/DeFi contracts is going to create a fascinating competitive environment. That's topped off by the excellent airdrop policy (excluding Ripple - and hopefully Jed and other founders) and Flare's governance/voting model that should be a benchmark for other projects to follow. What's there not to like? Buckle up!

Hi All...My question is if I have transferred my XRP holdings to a Ledger Nano (where I keep all my coins and tolkens) and they are not held on an exchange (CoinBase) - How does Ripple know that I own XRP and how many? I understand there may be or has been a snapshot of holders but will I have to go and claim my Flare...I am somewhat confused...Thanks all!