Duke67 Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, ElMoskito said: 1. Myth: Ripple Consensus Ledger is centralized or a permissioned ledger That's not a myth. RCL is centralized for now. Most of the validators are owned by Ripple Labs. You cannot be a validator without being added by RL, the central authority. Decentralized with a central authority? Mouhahaha. What about the votes for the amendments? Who can vote except the validators? Can't you modify the protocol and the rules with an amendment?... Come on. Dear @ElMoskito, I am sorry but you are WRONG. I did not intend to go open with this, but your furious and nervous comments force me to tell you a little story of my own validator that I am running since about October 2016. I am not a Ripple employee and never was. After I set the machine up (~2 hours), the node was accepted within some 30 minutes. My impression was that it all was fully automated. Currently it has 21 valid connections to other validators and nodes. You can go, pay a few bucks for your very own virtual machine, buy some cheap certificate and within a couple hours a new validator called "ElMoskito" can be running too! How would that be possible if RCL is centralized in the way you try to suggest? Edited January 14, 2017 by Duke67 rippleric, jp2017 and T8493 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmbartley Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 (edited) @Duke67 Is your validator part of the UNL for the Ripple validators? Do they trust your validator? It is very possible that I'm misunderstanding something here but when I look at https://ripple.com/ripple.txt it appears that Ripple validators only trust other Ripple validators and that other validators on the network by and large trust the other Ripple validators not your validator. Edited January 14, 2017 by cmbartley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post miguel Posted January 14, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted January 14, 2017 Thanks for the kind words and for the continued interest in all things XRP and Ripple. Comments and tough love are always welcome btw, as long as the comments are constructive and there is some actual love. I've been impressed with the generally positive and friendly demeanor of the conversations here and am looking forward to significantly participating as things progress. We're going to have much to discuss going forward. Tuesday is just the beginning. Hope everyone has a nice weekend. PunishmentOfLuxury, D-fault123, rippleric and 23 others 26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke67 Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 I knew it! Welcome here @miguel. Excellent job so far! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke67 Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 @cmbartley, honestly I do not take care too much about that machine. It always starts with contacting RL1-5 and very soon, within a minute, about 20 connections is being established. There is a mechanism to build a network of nodes automatically. "Historically" my validator shows 0.99+ agreement rate, so I guess it's being accepted. TPM 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T8493 Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 3 minutes ago, Duke67 said: @cmbartley, honestly I do not take care too much about that machine. It always starts with contacting RL1-5 and very soon, within a minute, about 20 connections is being established. There is a mechanism to build a network of nodes automatically. "Historically" my validator shows 0.99+ agreement rate, so I guess it's being accepted. That doesn't mean you're in UNL of other nodes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post JoelKatz Posted January 14, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted January 14, 2017 4 hours ago, Hodor said: Yep. With any software, even decentralized software like blockchain miners or validators, there still has to be a governance organization that is by definition centralized, to maintain it. It doesn't change the nature of the decentralization of the running parts, however. Very well-said. Right, so long as that governance organization doesn't hold some secret sauce or power that prevents people from defecting should they disagree with its decisions. Bitcoin was not centralized even while everyone was running precisely the software Gavin said they should run. Gavin held no patents nor restrictive copyright licenses. He had no ability to compel people to run the software he said they should run. People just followed him because that seemed best. He had power -- people would follow him even with decisions not precisely the ones they most liked because he had the power to build consensus and because it saved people lots of effort. But as soon as people disagreed with him enough to outweigh the convenience of following him, they defected and Bitcoin governance is, frankly, worse because of it. A benevolent dictator that people follow voluntarily because they make good decisions is a good form of governance. We would much prefer that they were large numbers of interested parties actively participating. We've been working aggressively on making that happen for two years now, and it has been slow going. Our hope is that eventually there would be more than one such governance organization so that they could also keep an eye on each other. Organizations would, at a minimum, recommend a list of validators believed to be unlikely to collude (because they are operated by unique organizations). RCL's amendment scheme is a unique way to allow system rule governance to flow automatically and smoothly from UNL governance. If the UNLs of trusted validators reflect the stakeholders of the network, the evolution of the network's rules should too. And if the ultimate stakeholders feel the rules are evolving in a way they disagree with, they can just change their UNLs. warpaul, Ant, rippleric and 7 others 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
namini Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 The question is, why it has been slow going, despite your efforts. Professor Hantzen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmbartley Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 I'd be interested to know why MIT dropped their validator, why Bitstamp, Gatehub, and global iD aren't running validators, why technology partners like Earthport and Tenemos aren't running validators, and why partner banks aren't running publicly verified validators. On another note, I can't get magine how difficult it is to launch a company in such a public and open way as Ripple has. Kudos. D-fault123, xtrapower, winthan and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-fault123 Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 So one of many challenges with FIs seems to be to make them actually understand how a distributed ledger (using a social consensus algo) is supposed to run. Maybe the stakes aren't high enough for the FIs and they think it's not worth it (yet?), as there isn't a carrot like with bitcoin's block reward and tx fees for miners. On the other hand, I don't think those FIs would fall for a reward based validation system as it essentially wouldn't run by the network's common good or honesty. Or maybe the FIs are still figuring out the concept of "frenemies" in the context of social consensus dledgers. Anyway, that's one hell of a puzzle for ripple to solve. XRP distribution has also been a tough nut to crack, but I'm way more optimistic regarding that than I was a few years ago. Been getting much better than it used to be. It used to be terrible, now it's only "fairly bad" currently. MM incentive program may potentially turn out to be a great way to distribute XRP and improve XRP liquidity. All in all, personally I am an optimist. Ripple has surprised me positively too many times to start doubting them now. XRP is still 100% speculative and its potential is very difficult to understand, therefore its daily/seasonal ups and downs are irrelevant to me right now. There isn't a distributed ledger system being used by serious FIs right now, zero. Volume created by cryptos is ~100% speculative. I'm in this because ripple has gathered quite a group of badasses and they are already working with FIs and fintech software giants behind the closed doors. They might actually be the ones to pull off the challenge of luring institutions to start using a public dledger. nur, smoothy, TPM and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grondiwam Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 The release emanates good vibes, but the people who pore through prospectuses and offer documents (not saying crypto is like equity) need more than this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morty Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 Welcome to the forum @miguel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hodor Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 5 hours ago, xtrapower said: @Hodor U want this forum to be a echo chamber? How did you arrive at this conclusion? I've never objected to an open, sometimes aggressive discussion of topics. But tone matters. I stood on the sidelines on the previous forum and watched its owner continually pollute the forum with his own negative rants. I won't stand by idly again, and I certainly won't be shamed into silence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElMoskito Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 4 hours ago, Duke67 said: Dear @ElMoskito, I am sorry but you are WRONG. I did not intend to go open with this, but your furious and nervous comments force me to tell you a little story of my own validator that I am running since about October 2016. I am not a Ripple employee and never was. After I set the machine up (~2 hours), the node was accepted within some 30 minutes. My impression was that it all was fully automated. Currently it has 21 valid connections to other validators and nodes. You can go, pay a few bucks for your very own virtual machine, buy some cheap certificate and within a couple hours a new validator called "ElMoskito" can be running too! How would that be possible if RCL is centralized in the way you try to suggest? I'm not wrong. You can be a validator (even if you need to see your account validated by RL that acts like a central authority). But that's not because you're a validator that's you can vote for amendments. In fact only Ripple validators can. @cmbartley mentionned it correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElMoskito Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Hodor said: How did you arrive at this conclusion? If tone matters then I should feel insulted by your post: It was a bit short for an answer. Edited January 14, 2017 by ElMoskito Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now