Jump to content

INFOGRAPHIC: Ripple vs SWIFT


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Ripple vs SWIFT gpi (INFOGRAPHIC) Comparison of the two most popular cross-border payment networks. Link: http://stedas.hr/ripple-vs-swift-gpi.html  

Nice! I made my on my own version of this infographic...

Swift-Ripple integration: (Ironically Swift is the name of a UK caravan manufacturer. Build quality is not wonderful.)

Posted Images

Just now, AlibabaGrp said:

Ripple should have IMF or Federal Reserve to watch over the 60 billion XRPs or have some sort of authority, so no one can say a company owns 60% of the tokens

Or burn them all. 40 billion supply that's divisable is plenty. 

The Federal Reserve? You do realize they are "loaning" the US (in debt at least $21,000,000,000,000) over a trillion $$ a year and we have a fractional reserve lending process that makes money out of thin air. Literally.

But the public image of the Federal Reserve is somehow good. The media is a powerful weapon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, seasonal said:

The Federal Reserve? You do realize they are "loaning" the US (in debt at least $21,000,000,000,000) over a trillion $$ a year and we have a fractional reserve lending process that makes money out of thin air. Literally.

But the public image of the Federal Reserve is somehow good. The media is a powerful weapon.

It's not worse than Ripple owning 60% of all tokens. It's not a good look either way, wether it's in an escrow or not. The only thing that makes it centralized is pretty much that, not the xrp ledger. 

When XRP was created, the plan was banks would buy and hold and use it... But clearly that didn't workout hence Ripple keeps saying banks don't have to hold, therefore volitality doesn't matter. So things have changed and now it's just banks using xRapid which uses XRP, no holding. Again, 40 billion of XRP, it's divisible, it's plenty for what it's trying to achieve

Edited by AlibabaGrp
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AlibabaGrp said:

It's not worse than Ripple owning 60% of all tokens. It's not a good look either way, wether it's in an escrow or not. The only thing that makes it centralized is pretty much that, not the xrp ledger. 

When XRP was created, the plan was banks would buy and hold and use it... But clearly that didn't workout hence Ripple keeps saying banks don't have to hold, hence volitality doesn't matter. So things have changed. Again, 40 billion of XRP, it's divisible, it's plenty for what it's trying to achieve

We are so early that we don't know how many XRP banks will suck up.

And Ripple VS The Federal R holding 60% of the XRP.... I go with Ripple every trip of the train. The Federal reserve is a end around the taxpayer. Want a War don't ask the taxpayer (voter) borrow $$ from the Fed-Want a bail out (2008) don't ask the taxpayer (voter) borrow $$ from the Fed. Want to control industry in the US give loans only to specific people/industries and deny other industries.

The Fed has the best public relations money can buy-the press that is owned by 6 major corporations (that get loans from the Fed).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, seasonal said:

We are so early that we don't know how many XRP banks will suck up.

And Ripple VS The Federal R holding 60% of the XRP.... I go with Ripple every trip of the train. The Federal reserve is a end around the taxpayer. Want a War don't ask the taxpayer (voter) borrow $$ from the Fed-Want a bail out (2008) don't ask the taxpayer (voter) borrow $$ from the Fed. Want to control industry in the US give loans only to specific people/industries and deny other industries.

The Fed has the best public relations money can buy-the press that is owned by 6 major corporations (that get loans from the Fed).

 

Dang, this guy literally tries to go off topic everytime I tell him Ripple owning 60% is no bueno. Dude.... Forget federal reserve, any other regularity entity having authority on the 60bil XRPs is better than a startup owning 60% and trying to sell it to big institutions. We got it, Fed reserve is ran by the devil himself. The point I'm making here is Ripple owning 60% is not as great as Ripple owning none, founders own 6% is fine.

And no, if banks don't need to hold XRP to use it why the hell would they hold it? That's exactly what xRapid does. That's exactly what Ripple has been saying this whole year. 

I guarantee you one of XRPs setbacks is the 60% holding by Ripple than anything else. It's just a risk for FIs that they don't need, now go tell them how amazing Chris Larsen and Brad G are and they won't ever let shady **** happens.

Also, I'm not saying this because burning the xrps will boost the price because it won't. XRPs price won't move if 60billion are burnt because they're not available. Fundamentals just get better

Edited by AlibabaGrp
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, AlibabaGrp said:

Dang, this guy literally tries to go off topic everytime I tell him Ripple owning 60% is no bueno. Dude.... Forget federal reserve, any other regularity entity having authority on the 60bil XRPs is better than a startup owning 60% and trying to sell it to big institutions. We got it, Fed reserve is ran by the devil himself. The point I'm making here is Ripple owning 60% is not as great as Ripple owning none, founders own 6% is fine. 

And no, if banks don't need to hold XRP to use it why the hell would they hold it? That's exactly what xRapid does. That's exactly what Ripple has been saying this whole year. 

I guarantee you one of XRPs setbacks is the 60% holding by Ripple than anything else. It's just a risk for FIs that they don't need, now go tell them how amazing Chris Larsen and Brad G are and they won't ever let shady **** happens.

Also, I'm not saying this because burning the xrps will boost the price because it won't. XRPs price won't move if 60billion are burnt because they're not available. Fundamentals just get better

Well the topic was yours......And my responses were measured and polite to your post in this forum.

And maybe we will have to agree to disagree.

Edited by seasonal
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, AlibabaGrp said:

any other regularity entity having authority on the 60bil XRPs is better than a startup owning 60% and trying to sell it to big institutions. The point I'm making here is Ripple owning 60% is not as great as Ripple owning none, founders own 6% is fine.

And no, if banks don't need to hold XRP to use it why the hell would they hold it? That's exactly what xRapid does. That's exactly what Ripple has been saying this whole year. 

I guarantee you one of XRPs setbacks is the 60% holding by Ripple than anything else. It's just a risk for FIs that they don't need, now go tell them how amazing Chris Larsen and Brad G are and they won't ever let shady **** happens.

I agree and disagree.  i agree with you about having another regulated, third-party holding or at least overseeing the Escrow process would be very good.  Get it out of Ripple's "control".  Even though everyone at Ripple wants nothing more than to see XRP go up in value doing this would complete the decentralization argument once and for all.   I'm no expert but the IMF seems like the best option for this.  For many reasons I'm glad that Chris Larsen is involved with the IMF.  

I disagree about banks not ever holding XRP.  Right now its volatile and all speculative but if XRP functions as a global settlement asset OR Coil is a huge hit OR one more more major successes result from Xpring using XRP than it becomes Utility driven value and I would venture a guess that governments facing runaway inflation such as Venezuela would rather hold XRP than ride the sinking ship of their own FIAT.   If any of this happens then 100 billion XRP might just seem like a tiny, tiny number.  

Edited by aavkk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ripple owning 60% of XRP is a pain point for me. At the same time who or how would a business find a trust worthy custodian. It seems like escrow was a way to solve a problem. Maybe in the future there will be an option that removes Ripple from custodianship of the XRP without jeopardizing overall stability.  The flip side who has the best interest of xrp success. Right now ripple is like the federal reserve printing money until all xrp are in circulation. Burn sure. Keep until demand is there sure. In the end unless someone has a great idea then so be it.  By the way nice info graphic. 

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
×
×
  • 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.