Why did Jed McCaleb leave Ripple to start Stellar

[kanaas]

11 hours ago, Morty said:

Haha.... That's the 'max' ....

[enrique11]

51 minutes ago, hesque said:

This is pretty slick biz model from IOTA, create a problem that didn't exist and then sell the solution.

The structure and nature of IOTA's tangle is different.  It's a 3rd-gen blockless/ledgerless crypto and to transact one has verify two previous transactions. So to mount a successful attack against IOTA's tangle network, it appears to me that you have to exponentially increase your attack as the number of transactions to verify grows exponentially (2^N) with the number of transactions submitted (N). I still need to get around to the details of this when I get time as I might have an oversimplified view of it currently.

Edited October 28, 2017 by enrique11

[Guest]

1 hour ago, enrique11 said:

Yes, I agree with you on most aspects, but POW is not as wasteful as people believe. They only think it is because when most people think of POW, bitcoin first comes to mind and the power-hungry ASIC miners that currently dominate bitcoin mining but didn't always. POW has become more efficient with time and IOTA plans to eventually incorporate POW ASIC hashing capability into production IOT chips...these chips they claim will be minimally power consumptive, almost indistinguishable in power consumption from their normal counterparts and yet IOTA will still be able to provide fee-free transactions. I'm really curious to see how efficient their ASIC-enabled chips will be.

energy efficient POW is an oxymoron.

POW means miners will burn so much energy at calculating literally nonsense up to the point when it is barely profitable, while the difficulty of the nonsense that needs to be computed to find the next block, increases to prevent that more than n blocks per hour are found.

This way there is a linear correlation between price of btc and energy spent on mining new coins. In the sense that energy spent follows market price of btc, not the other way.

Currently Bitcoin mining requires something like 1/1000th of the worlds daily energy. If the Bitcoin price would increase x 1000, so would it's energy consumption, no matter how much more efficient the mining chips will be. Energy consumption would be equal to the current consumption of this entire planet. Thats obviously not going to happen. Bitcoin is not sustainable, and the party will end. It was only temporary needed to kick in the door for sustainable solutions such as Ripple.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, lucky said:

while the difficulty of the nonsense

PoN: Proof of Nonsense!

[Amigo]

16 minutes ago, lucky said:

energy efficient POW is an oxymoron.

POW means miners will burn so much energy at calculating literally nonsense up to the point when it is barely profitable, while the difficulty of the nonsense that needs to be computed to find the next block, increases to prevent that more than n blocks per hour are found.

This way there is a linear correlation between price of btc and energy spent on mining new coins. In the sense that energy spent follows market price of btc, not the other way.

Currently Bitcoin mining requires something like 1/1000th of the worlds daily energy. If the Bitcoin price would increase x 1000, so would it's energy consumption, no matter how much more efficient the mining chips will be. Energy consumption would be equal to the current consumption of this entire planet. Thats obviously not going to happen. Bitcoin is not sustainable, and the party will end. It was only temporary needed to kick in the door for sustainable solutions such as Ripple.

Yesterday I made an illustration in another thred asking for ideas to get the environment friendlyness of XRP across.. ?

(feel free to share)

Edited October 28, 2017 by Amigo

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, lucky said:

energy efficient POW is an oxymoron.

POW means miners will burn so much energy at calculating literally nonsense up to the point when it is barely profitable, while the difficulty of the nonsense that needs to be computed to find the next block, increases to prevent that more than n blocks per hour are found.

To be fair, I wouldn't mind PoW as much as I do if it were atleast somewhat decentralized, as the energy spent would actually have a purpose in securing the system. If a PoW system has most of its hashrate provided by a handful of mining pools, THEN it is a waste of energy. Bitcoin currently is wasting energy if you ask me.

[Montoya]

15 hours ago, Max Entropy said:

@nikb

If Jed was as evil as Ripple says, then the IBM folks would not be doing business with Stellar... so I remain confident, without details, that Ripple mis-managed the situation.

I will leave it there. The folks here do not understand either the simplisities or the complexities of this type of business relationship.

:-)

Were you on XRPtalk when Jed announced his plan to flood the market? Then changed his mind? That told me enough about the man's character and maturity. Whatever happened between him and Ripple, nothing justifies such reckless and childish behavior. He decided to play chicken with his own company's board by threatening to destroy it. Think about that. And the chatters on XRPtalk were merely pawns, a means to an end, a blunt weapon to be wielded in his own personal vendetta. He may be visionary, but he will never lead a company successfully. Of that I'm certain. 

[Guest]

14 hours ago, Max Entropy said:

@nikb

If Jed was as evil as Ripple says, then the IBM folks would not be doing business with Stellar... so I remain confident, without details, that Ripple mis-managed the situation.

I will leave it there. The folks here do not understand either the simplisities or the complexities of this type of business relationship.

:-)

Nor do you. But it doesn't stop you from having a strong stance on things.

[kanaas]

Were you on XRPtalk when Jed announced his plan to flood the market? Then changed his mind? That told me enough about the man's character and maturity. Whatever happened between him and Ripple, nothing justifies such reckless and childish behavior. He decided to play chicken with his own company's board by threatening to destroy it. Think about that. And the chatters on XRPtalk were merely pawns, a means to an end, a blunt weapon to be wielded in his own personal vendetta. He may be visionary, but he will never lead a company successfully. Of that I'm certain. 

Being visionary means that you make new and unusual ideas useful and working. Larsen did with eloan and prosper. Jed had ideas but never a good vision...

[Apollo]

12 hours ago, Ripple-n-Time said:

I've been reading on this forum for a long time.  Call it crawling before walking.   Max Entropy has a distinct "connection" to Jed, if it's not him directly, he's not far removed.  He has way too much knowledge of the past inner workings of Ripple to not be.  That being said, great thread.  I'd like to see continued dialogue between Joelkatz and Max Enteopy going forward.  And Mercury, I'd take you up on your whale challenge but the member that said "for the same reason whales don't drive their lambos thru the ghetto".......he's spot on...?

Cheers all and best to Ripple  

Knowledge? Where?   

I see lots of arbitrary and unsupported assumptions but I can't seem to find the knowledge part. 

[Apollo]

I would just like to point out that Jed stated:

Quote

When I left ripple the board was 2 people; myself and Chris.

I left because I made the mistake of bringing Chris on as CEO and it ended up being untenable to work with him for a variety of reasons.

 

In other words... Jed was not even forced out. So we can blame simple interpersonal differences for years of destructive and vindictive behavior which targeted his investors and the community?  

 

[nikb]

15 hours ago, Max Entropy said:

@nikb

If Jed was as evil as Ripple says, then the IBM folks would not be doing business with Stellar... so I remain confident, without details, that Ripple mis-managed the situation.

I will leave it there. The folks here do not understand either the simplisities or the complexities of this type of business relationship.

:-)

I doubt you’ll find a shortage of opinions on Jed or what he did, but don’t think anyone said that Jed is evil.

Like David, I too can’t claim to be unbiased. Perhaps, as you suggest, I may not even understand the “simplsities or the complexities of this type of business relationship.”

But at least I was there, as this was happening, and saw first hand what the results of Jed’s scorched earth campaign were.

But I really am not interested in revisiting the past or in blaming Jed. I’m looking forward to the future and know that, ultimately, Ripple’s success hinges on what the amazingly talented group of people at Ripple do, not what Jed McCaleb does.

[kuyu]

1 minute ago, nikb said:

I doubt you’ll find a shortage of opinions on Jed or what he did, but don’t think anyone said that Jed is evil.

Like David, I too can’t claim to be unbiased. Perhaps, as you suggest, I may not even understand the “simplsities or the complexities of this type of business relationship.”

But at least I was there, as this was happening, and saw first hand what the results of Jed’s scorched earth campaign were.

But I really am not interested in revisiting the past or in blaming Jed. I’m looking forward to the future and know that, ultimately, Ripple’s success hinges on what the amazingly talented group of people at Ripple do, not what Jed McCaleb does.

 

 

His main issue is peer to peer. He is using all avenues to hit you on peer-to-peer. It's his ideology. Your very success with institutions contravenes it, so regardless if he knows Jeb or not, he will use any avenue to get you for what he is ideologically opposed to. So just keep doing what you are doing. At best your success will give him something to chew on.

[MyXRPie]

4 hours ago, nikb said:

But I really am not interested in revisiting the past or in blaming Jed. I’m looking forward to the future and know that, ultimately, Ripple’s success hinges on what the amazingly talented group of people at Ripple do, not what Jed McCaleb does.

This!

Well said, Nik.

[JTxrPP]

19 hours ago, Max Entropy said:

 

Peer to peer money, like Napster, is now possible. BitTorrent is now a commonly accepted protocol. Banks will need to accept this and play a different role.

--

I will return - when Stellar XLM/STR challenges XRP's valuation. Who could have foreseen this.

 If Stellar enables peer to peer, then they will win.

P2P applications have been around for roughly over 2 decades now; in that time, who have they displaced? who's lunch have they eaten?  only the **** industry's? The Music and Film industries that were initially negatively impacted have evolved and changed their business model via streaming services like Spotify, Pandora, SoundCloud, Amazon Music/Movies, Netflix, Hulu, etc---are those successful services Peer-to-Peer?

If P2P really provided a service that the masses wanted, then why are people still willing to pay out of pocket for music, film, etc? Could something else bigger than "having the right tech/system" be at play here, say morality?

"BitTorrent is now a commonly accepted protocol." -Max

^^Maybe among Pirates and for people that are living on a budget, but BitTorrent has still failed to gain real legitimacy; it is still an activity that one does in the dark.