Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
expireD

Are we decentralized yet?

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, expireD said:

I'm looking forward to the end of this year when the XRP ledger will be more decentralized than BTC and ETH.

It is not going to make any difference to BTC/ETH maximalists such as Brian Armstrong because their definition of "decentralized" includes not only technical decentralization (aka redundancy) but also decentralized project ownership and steering.

Add to that this deliberately misleading comparison table and I think that our chances of ever seeing XRP on CB are pretty much non-existent  (...unless the entire CB executive team gets fired, which probably wouldn't be a bad thing at this point).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, automatic said:

It is not going to make any difference to BTC/ETH maximalists such as Brian Armstrong because their definition of "decentralized" includes not only technical decentralization (aka redundancy) but also decentralized project ownership and steering.

Add to that this deliberately misleading comparison table and I think that our chances of ever seeing XRP on CB are pretty much non-existent  (...unless the entire CB executive team gets fired, which probably wouldn't be a bad thing at this point).

That's something which has bothered me: the perversion of the term "decentralized," which used to refer to a property of a network, but now seems to refer to any aspect of a crypto asset that can tie it to one majority stakeholder.

Share this post


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

That's something which has bothered me: the perversion of the term "decentralized," which used to refer to a property of a network, but now seems to refer to any aspect of a crypto asset that can tie it to one majority stakeholder.

Like any big innovation it starts with technique and fighting about it. But the way i see it, as a non tech expert, at the end investors don’t mind centralized or decentralized. They care about use case, profit, management and communication.

The issue is that we are still in the fighting phase and those kids like Armstrong just want attention. He should focus on his own so called mission of “helping the unbanked”. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im fairly sure the 97% of value held by top 100 wallets is completely wrong.

From memory it's closer to 70% in top 126 accounts or something like that.

Not to mention the public nodes missing, which are higher than that of Ripple nodes ( as stated above).

There are 0 entities with 50%+ voting power in the XRPL.

Also how can 3 different parties have more than 50% mining power?... 

This whole thing just seems completely wrong, and especially intentionally misleading about the decentralization of XRP.

Edited by retryW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decentralization is of upmost importance given the dialogue in Congress this past week. Technical decentralization with additional public validators is one thing but Ripple owning 60% of XRP is more concerning to me because it is an easier issue for the idiots in Congress to comprehend. Perhaps an airdrop to current hodlers until Ripple's position is 49% might be a way to address it but with their position escrowed it would need to be part of a long term plan with any portion not sold to partners being sent to hodlers. If Ripple announced something like this it'd certainly drive near term liquidity and if it put the XRP is a security debate to rest it may sustain that growth for the long term.

https://coincenter.org/link/sec-chairman-clayton-bitcoin-is-not-a-security

"Congressman Emmer stands up for cryptocurrency innovation and gets important regulatory clarification from the SEC. 

In today’s hearing, Congressman Emmer (R-MN) had an excellent line of questioning for the Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, William Hinman, on the subject of open blockchain tokens and regulation.

Hinman responded that the initial sale of a token is difficult to have without it being security issuance. But he also said that “it is certainly possible that there are tokens that would not have the hallmarks of a security.” He went on to specify what a token that doesn’t have those hallmarks might look like: “a token where the holder is buying it for its utility rather than investment, especially if it's a decentralized network in which it’s used with no central actors.”"

Edited by Lawyer

Share this post


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

Decentralization is of upmost importance given the dialogue in Congress this past week. Technical decentralization with additional public validators is one thing but Ripple owning 60% of XRP is more concerning to me because it is an easier issue for the idiots in Congress to comprehend. Perhaps an airdrop to current hodlers until Ripple's position is 49% might be a way to address it but with their position escrowed it would need to be part of a long term plan with any portion not sold to partners being sent to hodlers. If Ripple announced something like this it'd certainly drive near term liquidity and if it put the XRP is a security debate to rest it may sustain that growth for the long term.

https://coincenter.org/link/sec-chairman-clayton-bitcoin-is-not-a-security

"Congressman Emmer stands up for cryptocurrency innovation and gets important regulatory clarification from the SEC. 

In today’s hearing, Congressman Emmer (R-MN) had an excellent line of questioning for the Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, William Hinman, on the subject of open blockchain tokens and regulation.

Hinman responded that the initial sale of a token is difficult to have without it being security issuance. But he also said that “it is certainly possible that there are tokens that would not have the hallmarks of a security.” He went on to specify what a token that doesn’t have those hallmarks might look like: “a token where the holder is buying it for its utility rather than investment, especially if it's a decentralized network in which it’s used with no central actors.”"

Airdropping to existing holders!  Love that idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, retryW said:

Im fairly sure the 97% of value held by top 100 wallets is completely wrong.

From memory it's closer to 70% in top 126 accounts or something like that.

Not to mention the public nodes missing, which are higher than that of Ripple nodes ( as stated above).

There are 0 entities with 50%+ voting power in the XRPL.

Also how can 3 different parties have more than 50% mining power?... 

This whole thing just seems completely wrong, and especially intentionally misleading about the decentralization of XRP.

if you click on the 97% link, it will take you to an expanded view (here)

It's likely counting Ripple controlled wallets, Chris Larsen's wallet, etc

Edited by aye-epp
s/owned/controlled

Share this post


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

Airdropping to existing holders!  Love that idea.

Even better: AirDrop 40% of the monthly escrow each month for a year.

That will make hodlers hodl real good. 

Make it amazing: get top Ripple execs to forgo their Airdrops so you increase liquidity in the markets.

 

Share this post


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

Perhaps an airdrop to current hodlers until Ripple's position is 49% might be a way to address it

If they airdrop XRP to existing users the SEC would have an even better case for calling it a security.

Share this post


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

If they airdrop XRP to existing users the SEC would have an even better case for calling it a security.

Why’s that? You think it’d be viewed as a dividend? Would need to weigh that versus decentralization bc we’re already at risk of being deemed a security. If Ripple doesn’t control majority of coins they’re much better off. I was just noodling, haven’t researched the securities issue much yet and am not an expert in securities law. My focus is on technology and commercial transactions. 

Edited by Lawyer
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×