Jump to content
BobWay

Hi! I'm Bob

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

ok after watching a youtube video i was directed here and he mentions you are on here doin what Riiple doesnt usually do talk about the insides. WHat i dont understand is you state that Xrapid is not the thing that will be the thing to ft the price of  the coin. Can you advise what you beleive willl? I mean is ripple relying opnm Fomo, this is quite important, 31,32 cents is literally like a stablecoin I also dont understand how xrapid 1:1 bank to bank is going to lift the price.Andif you are going to say its going to be scarcity then wouldnt it be a safe bet that the it will then take years and i mean over 5 years to even reach over $2? What are you reay thinking we are going to see for the xrp price to go up. 

 

forget 2017 going up that was just fomo EVRYCON WENT UP THAT HAD NOTHING TO DDO WITH RIPPLE ITSELF, DO YOU AGREE?

 

THOUGHTS bob and ppl ?

 

edit :I mean i heard him say He would NOT use it to buy coffee, which i found to be quite odd especally from ceo , wouldnt you want it used in ALL cases? I mean if a shop alows xrp for coffee why on earth woulsnt you use it

I also once heard BG say he would NOT use xrp to buy coffee, i honestly did not like that he said that , why on EARTH wouldnt you? XRP works better as a currency then any currency on earth let alone al other uses

Edited by btemtd

Share this post


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

One of the reason that I'm so bullish on digital assets is that it can enable a society in which taxes and voting on what to spend the taxes can be organised in a completely automated, transparent and fair way.

Voting on what to spend tax money on is a bad idea imo, you'll end up with walls.

Share this post


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

I'd hate to repeat this pattern with the democratizing of the flow of funds and hope we can correct this with the flow of information over the next decade or so.

Yes please...  

I agree completely that the initial promise has been somewhat undermined by the big players.

Still overall a net boon I think.  I won’t be surprised if the IoV turns out similarly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JoelKatz said:

I think that any technology can be used for good or evil. Obviously, I would hate to see social credit develop in that direction.

I was definitely one of those people who believed that the Internet would inherently democratize the spread of information. Until a few years ago, i was thrilled with the idea that anyone could publish a web page or start a blog and get a huge following if people wanted to hear what they had to say. Seeing the gatekeepers of information lose their power was a wonderful thing. As you all know, in the past decade or so, new gatekeepers emerged with a small number of companies not only having huge control over what information can and cannot be easily shared but also having a revenue model based on gathering massive amounts of information that it has become impractical to keep private.

I'd hate to repeat this pattern with the democratizing of the flow of funds and hope we can correct this with the flow of information over the next decade or so.

Well you are all making great strides with all the work with building the Internet of Value.

I can't wait to see what all develops over the next 5-10 years.

You probably can see the potential more than anyone else, but know that all of us that are along for the ride want to see it all come to pass as well.

So many industries can benefit from this whole ecosystem, even if 1-10% of them at most adopt it, that is huge! 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Proof of work used to excite me, now I find it to be extremely scary. A 51% attack is expensive for a small group of "investors", but for a nation it is far cheaper than a nuclear weapons program. The ramification if another nation has adopted a POW project as a basis for their central bank, or a large corporation would be devastating for that nation or company.

The ETH Classic attack must have changed things for both companies and nations looking at crypto. It surely scared Vitalik and the ETH team.

To think that Opencoin and the team saw this coming 8 years ago.

Edited by mandelbaum

Share this post


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

Speaking of which, we had someone open a PR to extend escrows to IOUs which I thought was great. I hope he completes the changes so it can be merged. More generally, I hope that more people start contributing.

So excellent to read that review and see the care and attention to detail and the enthusiastic support for third party developers.

In complete contrast to the numbskulls that believe Ripple are an authoritarian monopoly on the codebase.  Sigh...  if only the numbskulls would open their eyes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it true there are trillian dollar guys in ripple ,, meaning "future trillionaires" I dont think that is a good thing that keeps being brought up 

is it even true, if it is offcourse people are thinking the originals practical pre-mined in there own bitcoin minded concept. Should rhe owners be allowed to hold the majority? and keep it ?and if thats the case the pre-mining anu coin is also fine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, JoelKatz said:

I'd hate to repeat this pattern with the democratizing of the flow of funds and hope we can correct this with the flow of information over the next decade or so.

For anyone in the crypto space who insists on drumming on about the "escrow issue", I think they would be wise to take a moment to actually listen to what you guys say and do. 

It is my understanding that the philosophy and worldview of you and your colleagues wouldn't allow you in good conscious to support maintaining an unfair influence over the supply of XRP.  

Thank you David, @BobWay and @nikb as well as everyone commenting for what has been a wonderful thread! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree, with ^ but media loves making dumb comments about ""ripples" trillionairs" is there anywhere that states how much the founders can own.. i mean can they say we want 10 billion each and thats that or are there rules..

Share this post


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

I think that any technology can be used for good or evil. Obviously, I would hate to see social credit develop in that direction.

I was definitely one of those people who believed that the Internet would inherently democratize the spread of information. Until a few years ago, i was thrilled with the idea that anyone could publish a web page or start a blog and get a huge following if people wanted to hear what they had to say. Seeing the gatekeepers of information lose their power was a wonderful thing. As you all know, in the past decade or so, new gatekeepers emerged with a small number of companies not only having huge control over what information can and cannot be easily shared but also having a revenue model based on gathering massive amounts of information that it has become impractical to keep private.

I'd hate to repeat this pattern with the democratizing of the flow of funds and hope we can correct this with the flow of information over the next decade or so.

David what are your thoughts on holochain in general and what holo are trying to do with decentralising the internet and giving individuals back ownership of their data? 

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

×
×
  • Create New...