Jump to content
xrpmoonboiz

Why XRP NOT mooning might be good/xPool possibility aka tinfoil hat time

Recommended Posts

Timeframes and regulations and adoption will always take longer than anticipated.

 

Building the Internet of Value is a monumental task. 

 

This is going to take years. 

 

The Internet took decades to develop and the infrastructure and monetization of it took millions of users.

Businesses need to see the value associated with the cost of adoption and implementation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, xrpmoonboiz said:

Now - that’s all for me. Please let me know if this is all stupid and I should take it down. I’m going to enjoy the rest of my vino but I wanted to share this with you all. I’m sure it took various turns but, hopefully, it makes sense and encourages people to go dig deep in the patents/other articles and connect the dots.

Great post! The idea of a master algorithm that provides liquidity just-in-time to where it’s needed is kind of fascinating. Taking it a step further you could implement machine learning to anticipate where & when liquidity shortfalls could happen, and pre-empt them (and maybe vice versa). Maybe getting way off track. But although intuitively, it might seem like this would depress the xrp price, arguably it could increase the value of the network quite a bit - which would flow into the price, inevitably. It would be like a dynamic, real-time monetary policy and would optimize the advantage that Ripple has with its xrp stash. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BehindtheLedger said:

Great post! The idea of a master algorithm that provides liquidity just-in-time to where it’s needed is kind of fascinating. Taking it a step further you could implement machine learning to anticipate where & when liquidity shortfalls could happen, and pre-empt them (and maybe vice versa). Maybe getting way off track. But although intuitively, it might seem like this would depress the xrp price, arguably it could increase the value of the network quite a bit - which would flow into the price, inevitably. It would be like a dynamic, real-time monetary policy and would optimize the advantage that Ripple has with its xrp stash. 

You make a very interesting point and Bob actually said that in one of his posts. He was analyzing Stefan's claim (which eventually became the patent) and Bob thought it would only depress the price of xrp...until it didn't. And then they patented that process. 

Here's a little excerpt from the patent that talks about the 'monitoring computing device'

Snip20190315_25.thumb.png.274c11153f2ba9ff319e618402b7bac9.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the detailed post and welcome back.

I might disagree with a couple of points in there that I think you may be mistaken about....  none of that detracts from your main points though.

3 hours ago, xrpmoonboiz said:

market makers do not care about price. They make money off of the spread and the narrower the spread, the more money they make.

Actually I don’t think that is correct...  they actually make more of the spread is bigger.  But they prefer a tight spread because that is a sign of a deeply liquid market with less volatility risk.  I could be wrong..  but that’s what I believe.

3 hours ago, xrpmoonboiz said:

However, Bob Way said it himself the other day - xRapid probably isn’t going to move the price of XRP. 

I thought I had seen him say he has identified at least two different factors that will put upward pressure on price...  so I’m surprised to hear that he thinks otherwise...  I’d be grateful if anyone can clarify that...

 

Now regarding the pool thing...   I think there is a fair chance you are correct that XPool is going to be a pooled resource providing just-in-time liquidity across all corridors.  And that Bobs patent is in that mix.  And that Bob indicated his patent method would be an upward pressure on price.

But I differ with you about the timing...   I would be very surprised if the period monitored is a month.  I would expect that cutting edge tech will be utilising a real time system.

4 hours ago, xrpmoonboiz said:

I would guess that the monitoring period is a month...when Ripple’s XRP is locked in escrow.

As I say...  I think a month is an eon in this new InternetOfValue world that Ripple and others are starting to usher in.

Just my comments and thoughts on your detailed and considered post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Tinyaccount said:

Thanks for the detailed post and welcome back.

I might disagree with a couple of points in there that I think you may be mistaken about....  none of that detracts from your main points though.

Actually I don’t think that is correct...  they actually make more of the spread is bigger.  But they prefer a tight spread because that is a sign of a deeply liquid market with less volatility risk.  I could be wrong..  but that’s what I believe.

I thought I had seen him say he has identified at least two different factors that will put upward pressure on price...  so I’m surprised to hear that he thinks otherwise...  I’d be grateful if anyone can clarify that...

 

Now regarding the pool thing...   I think there is a fair chance you are correct that XPool is going to be a pooled resource providing just-in-time liquidity across all corridors.  And that Bobs patent is in that mix.  And that Bob indicated his patent method would be an upward pressure on price.

But I differ with you about the timing...   I would be very surprised if the period monitored is a month.  I would expect that cutting edge tech will be utilising a real time system.

As I say...  I think a month is an eon in this new InternetOfValue world that Ripple and others are starting to usher in.

Just my comments and thoughts on your detailed and considered post.

Great to be back and love the response!

You're 100% right about market makers making more money if the spread is bigger and that they'll want a tighter spread for the reasons you mentioned. Also, as more market makers enter the space, the MM with the tightest spread will end up winning since the best price will get the trade.

Regarding xRapid, I think I misinterpreted Bob's comment (pic attached). Since his response didn't indicate it could increase the price, I took it that it wouldn't, my mistake. But you are right that he mentioned 2 factors: 1) new traders buying xrp to be market makers and 2) people holding xrp to reduce payment cost.

Regarding the month, I'm with you in thinking that it could/should be a real-time system. My reasoning behind the month time frame was that the patent sounds very similar to Ripple's escrow which releases xrp every month, so my initial thought was that this system might track the various resource paths over each month, and when the xrp is released every month it would automatically distribute based on the calculations over that month.

I'll follow that up with, is all of Ripple's xrp in escrow or is there some that they could be using now to fund different corridors?

Snip20190317_1.thumb.png.f818dd664f371eb75da38f125315bbac.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, xrpmoonboiz said:

is all of Ripple's xrp in escrow or is there some that they could be using now to fund different corridors?

Well so far the bigger bulk of every months escrow is not being used,  and is going back to the end of the chain.  So essentially they have up towards a billion just right there.  I would think they also have a bill or so lurking around in someone’s back pocket.

So yeah they could fund any conceivable usage from the institutions that we know of right now with ease I would think.

But there may be significant players in the pipeline so things can change suddenly.  Personally that’s what I suspect will happen...  they will do a lay down mozair on us all leaving a lot of stunned faces.  But that could be just my optimism and light grip on reality speaking...  :) 

Edited by Tinyaccount
Changed ‘touch’ to ‘grip’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, xrpmoonboiz said:

That patent (resource transfer setup and verification) sounds VERY MUCH like what everyone thinks the Interledger Protocol will be...and that patent was just given in January of 2019. It’s also interesting that Bob Way mentioned xCurrent uses ILP 1.0...I’m not sure exactly what 1.0 entails but is 1.0 just atomic payments when you can leverage Nostro/Vostro accounts? Could the latest version that just got patented be the ILP we all think it is in terms of connectors moving various assets (fiat/crypto/etc) at once over multiple payment paths aka multihop? Bob said the current version ILP is 4.0...customers were also supposedly beginning the transition to xCurrent 4.0 last fall...a couple of months before the patent was formally issued. Very interesting.

 

Funny you mentioned ILP connectors. Just recently, the Coil team based in Cape Town, South Africa, just recently reconfigured/streamlined the connectors for ILP called, Rafiki. You might want to take a look at this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, xrpmoonboiz said:

It’s also interesting that Bob Way mentioned xCurrent uses ILP 1.0...I’m not sure exactly what 1.0 entails but is 1.0 just atomic payments when you can leverage Nostro/Vostro accounts? Could the latest version that just got patented be the ILP we all think it is in terms of connectors moving various assets (fiat/crypto/etc) at once over multiple payment paths aka multihop? Bob said the current version ILP is 4.0...customers were also supposedly beginning the transition to xCurrent 4.0 last fall...a couple of months before the patent was formally issued. Very interesting.

If I remember correctly, ILP 4 is tailored for faster and smaller data packets whereas ILP 1 is more suited for larger data packets which RippleNet requires.

I’ll have a rummage on the Interledger forum now to double check.

https://forum.interledger.org/t/ilp-versions/179/2

There’s a couple of hyperlinks in the quote below, so better to use the above link for more info on HTLA’s + PennySwitching.

Quote

The first version of ILP had a focus on HTLAs 3 and assumed that the settlement ledger between any two nodes was using these AND that the condition and fulfillment used in the ILP payment was the same one used in each transfer on each intermediary ledger.

As a result the format of the ILP packet was very different and we also experimented with pre-payment protocols to do quoting and liquidity checks.

There were some experiments done to change this and ILP v2 and ILP v3 pretty much died before they really lived.

ILP v4 (the version we are currently working from) was born of the idea that we should abstract away the ledger and assume that any two peers on the network have “some” way to settle but that ILP doesn’t require that settlement ledgers use HTLAs because sometimes two peers trust each other or have some other enforcement mechanism that ensures if they exchange packets and create settlement obligations between one another then these will be honoured.

This also makes ILP MUCH faster as the flow of packets happens over-the-top of the ledgers/settlement systems and doesn’t wait for them lock up funds etc.

Given that an ILP packet can therefor be routed from sender to receiver very fast the idea of focusing on very small amounts became more viable and instead of burdening the protocol with quoting and liquidity measurement logic we focused on “penny switching” 2.

So ILPv4 is designed to work well if:

The amounts in each packet are very small (the risk associated with a single packet taking an expensive path is limited so no need for quoting up front, also see how STREAM deals with costing a route).

The transfer of packets is very fast (implying that nodes use short expiries and also reduce their risk)

Some projects that use ILP like RippleNet and Mojaloop are using ILPv1 style HTLAs in the payment flow because they are operated in environments where this makes sense (controlled ecosystems where reliable quotes and large packet values are possible).

What is interesting is that it is possible for ILPv4 to be used to stream small payments through nodes that settle using ILPv1-style payments.

The reality is that those ILPv1 systems can move to using ILPv4 packet formats easily. They can even send large payments in each packet and route the packets via the ledgers (Mojaloop is already doing this). Nothing is technically preventing this, however, if those packets are routed over the “open Interledger” they will likely be rejected as they won’t find a path through connectors that are prepared to route large packets or route packets with long expiries.

So, while ILPv1 and ILPv4 do have some technical differences the real differences are in the expected properties of the network (fast responses and small per packet amounts) which will result in packets being rejected if they have:

Long expiries, and/or

Large amounts

 

Edited by Flintstone
Interledger link and quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2019 at 10:03 PM, DividendGamer said:

Timeframes and regulations and adoption will always take longer than anticipated.

 

Building the Internet of Value is a monumental task. 

 

This is going to take years. 

 

The Internet took decades to develop and the infrastructure and monetization of it took millions of users.

Businesses need to see the value associated with the cost of adoption and implementation.

While I agree that things take time, technology presently progresses at a much faster rate than when the internet was introduced to the masses. 

Tim Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web in 1989/90 (depending on who you ask), availability to the public happened in 1991 (first web browser), with the release of mosaic (browser that popularized the web) in 1993. To be conservative, let's say the average person didn't start using the web until around 1995 (going off my personal experience). 1995 to the release of Apple's app store (2008), was only 13 years. I use the app store as an example, because many consider that the start of "web 2.0"

Bitcoin has been around for nearly 9 years, and its obvious that the birth of the first digital asset has opened up the possibilities for a different type of payment system. I truly believe progression in this space will be achieved at a much faster rate than that of the past. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2019 at 2:53 AM, xrpmoonboiz said:

At the end of each month, Ripple distributes some of their XRP to various accounts to help build the ecosystem as they say.  They distribute it based on the volumes/costs of the previous month. Who are they distributing it to? My guess - market makers. This could be crypto exchanges or other institutions (think a trading desk at a bank) and they distribute the XRP in markets/payment paths where they believe it will help. They’re helping to make XRP the bridge currency in those markets.

I'm not sure I understood correctly, are you saying that Ripple will give away XRP for free just to build liquidity?

In this case I think you should read again this reply from @BobWay

 

 

 

Share this post


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

I'm not sure I understood correctly, are you saying that Ripple will give away XRP for free just to build liquidity?

In this case I think you should read again this reply from @BobWay

 

 

 

Distribute may have been the wrong word since Bob and others have said that doesn't work. I meant strategically sell their xrp to partners to incentivize them to use it and build deep liquidity pools in certain corridors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that David and Bob don't talk about xPool is a huge tell to it's potential impact on future price appreciation.

 

This is going to be a huge game changer.

 

I would be willing to bet that it will by itself cause the upcoming moon event to moon the moon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...