Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hammertoe

FUD fighting: "Ripple can just print more XRP"

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, madmatt said:

Lawyers world wide will love the day that Ripple Labs would suddenly increase the volume.

Probably WON'T happen. ie the increase in XRP supply. It will be an interesting problem to address, should 5-10 yrs down the line the value of XRP has risen dramatically due to demand. But then many investors still holding, would happily deal with this issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sukrim said:

In these systems, you would ALSO need to influence more than one player/actor/company/mining pool to adopt the new code.

This is a red herring argument once again. 

Both code bases are open source.  Both can be changed.  More Bitcoins could be added to the network, and more XRP could be added to the network. 

The key question here is "is it likely?"  The answer is a resoudning "no." 

14 hours ago, nikb said:

To be perfectly clear, I think that any such change would be ill-advised if not down right stupid and that it would never happen; anyone proposing it would be laughed out of the room.

But let's think outside the box. After all, code can always be changed and no mechanism could ever prevent that.

I'll start by pointing out that this isn't unique to Ripple; Bitcoin's 21 million BTC limit could be raised by changing the code too. The code inside a pacemaker could be changed to shock your heard to the tune of "Ice Ice Baby". The "the code can be changed" attack just doesn't carry a lot of weight with me. Sure, it can. But that doesn't mean it will.

I will put all my money and more on the professional opinion of @nikb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hodor said:

The key question here is "is it likely?"  The answer is a resoudning "no." 

I totally agree, however the other key question is "What would make this unlikely event possible and what safeguards exist?" (because both for BTC and XRP it is totally possible that more than the current maximum gets created, as you already said). There are at the moment more (and some different) safeguards in place for each blockchain.

Ripple Inc. definitely has a HUGE amount of control over XRPL, but also has (as mentioned) no direct incentive to exercise it as well as some disincentives (getting sued, losing key staff members) to not do it.

The bigger threat is anyways not extra XRP being created, but that over time the ledger as a public resource turns more and more into a semi-private controlled environment. To fight this, you need a diverse set of stakeholders and also the willingness to fight these tendencies as well as the openness to include others. Let's hope now that they have a lot more money (on paper) Ripple inc. focusses a bit more on long term visions rather than giving gifts to banks and conglomerates of banks (just look at when people get added to their Executive Board or Board of Directors/Advisors...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sukrim said:

There are at the moment more (and some different) safeguards in place for each blockchain.

Completely agree. 

Individuals can always attempt to change open-source code, but as long as the "commit access" (a.k.a. code governance) takes place to effectively review all submissions, tampering with detrimental effects should be a very low probability. 

Case in point: Mike Hearn (R3 fame) tried to change BTC core code to try and make bitcoins track-able:  https://cointelegraph.com/news/how-mike-hearn-sold-all-his-bitcoins-in-2016-and-market-proved-him-wrong

Somebody noticed, and did not commit that code.  But because it's all open-source, it's not dependent on trust; we can track everything that Ripple commits.  Yes, I agree with your points above.  I'd like to see Ripple champion an incredible way to decentralize that doesn't fall prey to stagnation like what happened with BTC core. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, madmatt said:

I foresee massive claims against Ripple Labs in the event they increase the volume. Ripple Labs do not operate in a legal vacuum.  They can not simply do whatever they want. XRP holders have a justified expectation that the volume policy does not radically change. Lawyers world wide will love the day that Ripple Labs would suddenly increase the volume. If such ever happens major XRP holders (institutional investors and private parties) will sue Ripple Labs. Although XRP is no stock its not mean that Ripple Labs can just  do as they please with the XRP volume. 

What are you implying? To the best of my knowledge market forces dictate Volume!... How does Ripple Labs have control over a market fundamental?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, vsyc said:

This is no different from Ripple Inc. 

The Freeze flag was unilaterally and retroactively(!) pushed down by Ripple Inc. for example. This is VERY different from Bitcoin, where you would actually need to "just" fork.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Sukrim said:

The Freeze flag was unilaterally and retroactively(!) pushed down by Ripple Inc. for example. This is VERY different from Bitcoin, where you would actually need to "just" fork.

Can we avoid this topic as a favor?  It has caused so much FUD - people believe it applies to XRP, when it only applies to user-created tokens. 

The fact that Ripple introduces code and approves it is an ongoing issue that is generic in nature - it's not specific to this one particular piece of code.  Should Ripple introduce code and allow time for public comment and review?  Yes.  I believe they usually do.  I think that banks and FI's need the ability to freeze their own tokens. 

 

Edited by Hodor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, vsyc said:

Can you clarify what are you talking about?

The Freeze flag. https://github.com/ripple/rippled/commit/4cf29455e427c23c9cef0fe9cbb9e6e9847c174b was pushed without(!) even an amendment and it was retroactively applied to all accounts on the ledger, making previously unfreezable IOUs freezable retroactively and without any way of recourse by users.

9 minutes ago, Hodor said:

Can we avoid this topic as a favor?

Why? This is the technical section after all, not Twitter... I would expect people that read the stuff here to already know how freezing works on XRPL.

Do you really say that stuff like making all IOUs freezable without an Amendment (not that it would matter until validators are actually decentralized...) is generic and happens all the time?

@mulder - how is this related to Ripple Inc. being theoretically able to create more XRP or not?

Edited by Sukrim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sukrim said:

it was retroactively applied to all accounts on the ledger, making previously unfreezable IOUs freezable retroactively and without any way of recourse by users

Well to implement this change, all devs know and understand you have to have *some* approach for setting the default behavior.  I don't regard this as a surprise - they had to choose some behavior or another as the default setting.

 

2 minutes ago, Sukrim said:

Why? This is the technical section after all, not Twitter... I would expect people that read the stuff here to already know how freezing works on XRPL.

Note the title of the thread.

3 minutes ago, Sukrim said:

Do you really say that stuff like making all IOUs freezable without an Amendment (not that it would matter until validators are actually decentralized...) is generic and happens all the time?

No.  Read my comment again... here it is:

10 minutes ago, Hodor said:

Should Ripple introduce code and allow time for public comment and review?  Yes.  I believe they usually do.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"they can just "print" more XRP"

 

lol

 

do you really think the same arguement cant be said for bitcoin, eth, fiat, ect?.  Whether its printing or counterfeiting its essentially the same concept..

That holds no water

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sukrim said:

The Freeze flag. https://github.com/ripple/rippled/commit/4cf29455e427c23c9cef0fe9cbb9e6e9847c174b was pushed without(!) even an amendment and it was retroactively applied to all accounts on the ledger, making previously unfreezable IOUs freezable retroactively and without any way of recourse by users.

Amendments weren't available at the time. The code was finished and enabled in commit https://github.com/ripple/rippled/commit/ce31e26f580044f89b960d76e12f39674e577ea0 which made it in on February of 2016.

Also, please note: issuers of IOUs could (and can continue to) choose to not honor their obligations; the only recourse users had was either public shaming or  legal action against the gateway. This is true whether the Freeze feature was implemented or not. The introduction of Freeze didn't change any of that. The only "change" was that issuers could freeze an IOU such that it couldn't be traded or used in any way other than having it returned to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, nikb said:

Amendments weren't available at the time

https://wiki.ripple.com/Change_Process already existed though and the discussion about the freeze flag here https://forum.ripple.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7101 and here https://forum.ripple.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6981 also was not exactly a masterpiece in community engagement (though at least back then new features were discussed and not just dropped and merged with no more info than a pull request and an internal bug ID - like Escrow, PayChan, Cryptoconditions, Checks, dynamic validator lists, Sharding, ShamapV2...).

It could very well have been implemented the opposite way of having to enable freezeability of IOUs explicitly instead of disclaiming it, preserving the original behaviour.

Anyways, it is done and a long time (in cryptocurrency land at least) ago too - it is just a prominent example on how so far Ripple Inc. has very strongly used their influence over both code and validation nodes to get what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jackdarippler said:

What are you implying? To the best of my knowledge market forces dictate Volume!... How does Ripple Labs have control over a market fundamental?

Volume in the sense of the total amount of xrp (including in escrow). Not usd  or btc value of circulating btc.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, benstr said:

Probably WON'T happen. ie the increase in XRP supply. It will be an interesting problem to address, should 5-10 yrs down the line the value of XRP has risen dramatically due to demand. But then many investors still holding, would happily deal with this issue. 

I certainly will be in front of the line in case I still hold ripple by then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...