Jump to content

XRP is Centrally Controlled by Ripple – Says Bank of International Settlements (BIS)


yxxyun
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, yxxyun said:

even with cobalt,  the 70% overlap requirement is also too high

"too high" for what, compared to what? You know that validators don't do anything interesting, right? simply follow deterministic rules. And there is no way around agreeing about a software version, and the rules enforced by that software, if you want to create a payment network of any kind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, lucky said:

"too high" for what, compared to what? You know that validators don't do anything interesting, right? simply follow deterministic rules. And there is no way around agreeing about a software version, and the rules enforced by that software, if you want to create a payment network of any kind.

https://forum.ripple.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15608  yeah, so I could easily create my private ledger. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, lucky said:

"too high" for what, compared to what? You know that validators don't do anything interesting, right? simply follow deterministic rules. And there is no way around agreeing about a software version, and the rules enforced by that software, if you want to create a payment network of any kind.

You have me convinced.Tnx :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, yxxyun said:

https://forum.ripple.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15608  yeah, so I could easily create my private ledger. 

I don't understand your point. Do you mean it is a bad feature, that you have the power to fork away from the network, and start your own? Don't you agree that should be an essential feature of a truly decentralized currency?

You realize that there is no partition tolerance in Bitcoin, and it's also not possible to just fork off, without securing massive support from miners? Does that seem a better model to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lucky said:

I don't understand your point. Do you mean it is a bad feature, that you have the power to fork away from the network, and start your own? Don't you agree that should be an essential feature of a truly decentralized currency?

You realize that there is no partition tolerance in Bitcoin, and it's also not possible to just fork off, without securing massive support from miners? Does that seem a better model to you?

70% overlap is a high requirement,  in production mode, I don't think ripple should allow people to use their own list, it's too risk, maybe find some way let rippled self-generate UNL is better.  but in development mode, allow people build own list and build private ledger is a good feature. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, yxxyun said:

70% overlap is a high requirement,  in production mode, I don't think ripple should allow people to use their own list, it's too risk, maybe find some way let rippled self-generate UNL is better.  but in development mode, allow people build own list and build private ledger is a good feature. 

my point is: it's a good feature to allow people build their own list in production mode, fork off, and build a public ledger. Participation in the main network, in which one entity has practical leadership, is voluntary. Anyone can take that leadership away and recruit support, this has been made super easy, and for a reason. It ensures the practical leader cannot dictate rules that are not agreed by the super majority of the network. Any attempt to do so will result in losing that practical leadership role. Because of this, you can't say that Ripple "controls"  the network, even if the majority just copies their UNL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lucky said:

my point is: it's a good feature to allow people build their own list in production mode, fork off, and build a public ledger. Participation in the main network, in which one entity has practical leadership, is voluntary. Anyone can take that leadership away and recruit support, this has been made super easy, and for a reason. It ensures the practical leader cannot dictate rules that are not agreed by the super majority of the network. Any attempt to do so will result in losing that practical leadership role. Because of this, you can't say that Ripple "controls"  the network, even if the majority just copies their UNL.

Well, at this point, it is a good feature to allow people split /fork network easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, lucky said:

my point is: it's a good feature to allow people build their own list in production mode, fork off, and build a public ledger. Participation in the main network, in which one entity has practical leadership, is voluntary. Anyone can take that leadership away and recruit support, this has been made super easy, and for a reason. It ensures the practical leader cannot dictate rules that are not agreed by the super majority of the network. Any attempt to do so will result in losing that practical leadership role. Because of this, you can't say that Ripple "controls"  the network, even if the majority just copies their UNL.

But my focus is making the network strong,  no fork, no split ,and no one is leading the network,  let rippled self generate unl not let people choose. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, yxxyun said:

Well, at this point, it is a good feature to allow people split /fork network easily.

Can you see a point when that will no longer be the case? I can't. I think one of the revolutionary aspects of crypto, and XRP in particular, is that it provides the freedom to regroup and redefine value, at any time. It's this freedom that will make sure Ripple will not abuse it's current leadership. And if they  ever do, it's "goodbye Ripple, hello new leader".

17 minutes ago, yxxyun said:

But my focus is making the network strong,  no fork, no split ,and no one is leading the network,  let rippled self generate unl not let people choose. 

So that's where we disagree. What we've seen with the Bitcoin scaling disaster, is that leadership is a requirement to get things done. Look at the amazing accomplishments of Ripple, those would not be possible without leadership. Yet, the Damocles sword of a network split is an essential feature to make sure leaders cannot abuse the power that is voluntary given to them by network participants.

Again, "let people choose" is exactly what has been implemented. This freedom includes allowing people to follow a leader, and allowing them to unfollow any moment they like.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, lucky said:

Can you see a point when that will no longer be the case? I can't. I think one of the revolutionary aspects of crypto, and XRP in particular, is that it provides the freedom to regroup and redefine value, at any time. It's this freedom that will make sure Ripple will not abuse it's current leadership. And if they  ever do, it's "bye".

So that's where we disagree. What we've seen with the Bitcoin scaling disaster, is that leadership is a requirement to get things done. Look at the amazing accomplishments of Ripple, those would not be possible without leadership. Yet, the Damocles sword of a network split is an essential feature to make sure leaders cannot abuse the power that is voluntary given to them by network participants.

Again, "let people choose" is exactly what has been implemented. This freedom includes allowing people to follow a leader, and allowing them to unfollow any moment they like.

It is also possible to fork network by mistake /mis-config.

Link to comment
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
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.