Jump to content

Xpring invested projects


yxxyun
 Share

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, TiffanyHayden said:

Have you met Ethereum? 

My point exactly. A broad platform, lots of developers which makes you expect it would rule the world by now. But what did it actually bring besides more coins with disputable white papers and cryptokitties.

I'm not aiming for a subjective discussion on whats good and not but for now not much in my opinion. Plans, pilots and tests. DeFi could be promising but for now a theoretical hype.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem that I have in understanding the situation is that Ripple have put real money,  and real effort, and real credibility into using the XRPL for core business functions.  If the XRPL hung, or lagged, or faults in any way then Ripple will suffer real business harm.

I think that is fairly unarguable since they promulgate ODL using XRPL.  (I’m aware that other crypto assets could be used,  but Ripple reputationally and ownership-of-asset wise have a big stake in the XRPL).  So,  any company that doesn’t have a risk analysis on such a core piece of infrastructure would be a giant fail.  I don’t think Ripple (and David, one of the creators of the XRPL ) are that stupid.
 

Given that,  there seems a disconnect between what you and others (many of whom have intimate knowledge of XRPL operationally) are saying about network fragility @TiffanyHayden ,  and what seems obvious: that Ripple shouldn’t allow such a situation against their own interests.

I can’t see where you are wrong Tiffany,  and I can’t see how Ripple could ignore fragility,  so I’m very puzzled about this matter.
 

I understand that you are friends with Nick (who is a big deal in the XRPL coding end of Ripple) and who is aware of this debate (Twitter posts) so it would seem that he should be able to get Ripple to provide some clarity on their view of XRPL robustness.  Could you please ask him to ask for that?   (Of course he may not want to or if I’ve strayed into your personal life too far then please just ignore that request but the rest of my posts stands)

What you are saying (and I believe you know something of it,) and what seems obviously in Ripple’s interest,  seem contradictory.  I can’t see how this could be or who is wrong.  Hence my puzzlement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dogowner5 said:

The problem that I have in understanding the situation is that Ripple have put real money,  and real effort, and real credibility into using the XRPL for core business functions.  If the XRPL hung, or lagged, or faults in any way then Ripple will suffer real business harm.

I think that is fairly unarguable since they promulgate ODL using XRPL.  (I’m aware that other crypto assets could be used,  but Ripple reputationally and ownership-of-asset wise have a big stake in the XRPL).  So,  any company that doesn’t have a risk analysis on such a core piece of infrastructure would be a giant fail.  I don’t think Ripple (and David, one of the creators of the XRPL ) are that stupid.
 

Given that,  there seems a disconnect between what you and others (many of whom have intimate knowledge of XRPL operationally) are saying about network fragility @TiffanyHayden ,  and what seems obvious: that Ripple shouldn’t allow such a situation against their own interests.

I can’t see where you are wrong Tiffany,  and I can’t see how Ripple could ignore fragility,  so I’m very puzzled about this matter.

From my perspective (just me, I'm always the outlier and I'm not always right), the enormous amount of currency that was generated into existence when the network was created was intended to be used to build the network . Sure, the founders kept 20%, fine, but everything that was promised for the XRPL, a public good, has instead gone to RippleNet, a private payments group, and to proprietary software that benefits Ripple exclusively, and to companies that Ripple wants to fund. The bare minimum does not exist for the XRPL and all of the resources it came into life with that could have been used to build an ecosystem that benefits the world, was taken and used for the benefit of one. Ripple can be successful with or without XRP. Ripple could abandon XRP. Ripple could create another coin. Hell, Ripple could even just use Stellar. Ripple has zero obligation to the XRP Ledger and they have made exactly that many explicit commitments to it -zero. For 2 years now, people have been cheerleading for something they aren't even allowed to see. Are you certain that XRP is vital to ODL and that ODL is vital to Ripple? Can you prove it? Can you find any screenshots of applications utilizing this transformative tech?  Who are the lucky people in the world allowed to test it out? Why can't Binance USA become an ODL partner? Because it looks like Bitstamp is the exclusive ODL partner for USD, meaning they get 100% of the corporate client flow when USD is sold for XRP. They don't have to compete with Binance, who really wants the opportunity. Volunteers are paying money out of pocket that can't be recouped to hold up a network for a $10 billion company that sells proprietary software that we aren't allowed to see and maybe even uses it to create monopolies? NONE OF THIS MAKES SENSE TO ME. 

I'm upset because I didn't notice sooner what this has turned into. And I still don't know what this is or why I'm the only one bothered. I believe in public payment infrastructure. With all of the currency for the public ledger in the hands of a private business who uses it to enrich itself and won't even provide the infrastructure needed to perform the 1500 TPS it brags about on its website, I don't know what there is to try and salvage here, for me, someone who was interested in the network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TiffanyHayden said:

From my perspective (just me, I'm always the outlier and I'm not always right), the enormous amount of currency that was generated into existence when the network was created was intended to be used to build the network . Sure, the founders kept 20%, fine, but everything that was promised for the XRPL, a public good, has instead gone to RippleNet, a private payments group, and to proprietary software that benefits Ripple exclusively, and to companies that Ripple wants to fund. The bare minimum does not exist for the XRPL and all of the resources it came into life with that could have been used to build an ecosystem that benefits the world, was taken and used for the benefit of one. Ripple can be successful with or without XRP. Ripple could abandon XRP. Ripple could create another coin. Hell, Ripple could even just use Stellar. Ripple has zero obligation to the XRP Ledger and they have made exactly that many explicit commitments to it -zero. For 2 years now, people have been cheerleading for something they aren't even allowed to see. Are you certain that XRP is vital to ODL and that ODL is vital to Ripple? Can you prove it? Can you find any screenshots of applications utilizing this transformative tech?  Who are the lucky people in the world allowed to test it out? Why can't Binance USA become an ODL partner? Because it looks like Bitstamp is the exclusive ODL partner for USD, meaning they get 100% of the corporate client flow when USD is sold for XRP. They don't have to compete with Binance, who really wants the opportunity. Volunteers are paying money out of pocket that can't be recouped to hold up a network for a $10 billion company that sells proprietary software that we aren't allowed to see and maybe even uses it to create monopolies? NONE OF THIS MAKES SENSE TO ME. 

I'm upset because I didn't notice sooner what this has turned into. And I still don't know what this is or why I'm the only one bothered. I believe in public payment infrastructure. With all of the currency for the public ledger in the hands of a private business who uses it to enrich itself and won't even provide the infrastructure needed to perform the 1500 TPS it brags about on its website, I don't know what there is to try and salvage here, for me, someone who was interested in the network.

Thanks for getting back to me.  You’ve raised a great many points there...  each probably worth it’s own thread to discuss further.  But the thing I want to get to the bottom of is this:  are you correct that there is a fragility of the ledger that will be revealed under load and/or if there is a number of validator outages?

I was hoping you could shed some light on whether Nik or David or anyone else at Ripple feels that your criticism of the robustness of the XRPL is valid.  To me the dissonance comes from the fact that their reputation really would suffer if the DA that they have repeatedly pushed in public turns out to fail under load.  So even if in future they did pivot to some other DA,  right now, today, their rep is on the line with the XRPL.  If it’s actually fragile then that’s a huge risk to go unaddressed.  

So although I don’t doubt that there was a low point of UNL validators at one moment, I can’t imagine they are now unaware of that potential issue.  So what explains their inaction?  That’s the puzzling bit.  
 

One possible scenario is that they have scripted failover stand-ins and replicated instances that can be stood up in short order if a loss of quorum were to approach.  Not saying they do, or that is likely,  I’m just pointing out that redundancy might be a quick script away at all times.


This honestly puzzles me because I believe you have identified an issue and yet there doesn’t seem to be a response to it.  That means to me that either:  it actually isn’t an issue,  or that they have a mitigator,  or they are blithely ignorant,  or that they really are indifferent to the XRPL.

The last two seem unlikely to me but then,  to a lesser extent,  so do the first two.  Maybe there is some other possibility I haven’t considered.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Dogowner5 said:

This honestly puzzles me because I believe you have identified an issue and yet there doesn’t seem to be a response to it.  That means to me that either:  it actually isn’t an issue,  or that they have a mitigator,  or they are blithely ignorant,  or that they really are indifferent to the XRPL.

The last two seem unlikely to me but then,  to a lesser extent,  so do the first two.  Maybe there is some other possibility I haven’t considered.

@nikb if it won’t get you in strife,  can you speak to any of the possibilities I listed?  Ignore this if it’s not something you wish to publicly comment on,  because I value your engagement and don’t wish to put you in a uncomfortable position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, nikb said:

I’m not sure how clustering would apply. Can you explain?

 

Clustering stock nodes validating txs,  validator for ordering. It is of course need higer hardware configuration when tps increase.

Edited by yxxyun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dogowner5 said:

Thanks for getting back to me.  You’ve raised a great many points there...  each probably worth it’s own thread to discuss further.  But the thing I want to get to the bottom of is this:  are you correct that there is a fragility of the ledger that will be revealed under load and/or if there is a number of validator outages?

I was hoping you could shed some light on whether Nik or David or anyone else at Ripple feels that your criticism of the robustness of the XRPL is valid.  To me the dissonance comes from the fact that their reputation really would suffer if the DA that they have repeatedly pushed in public turns out to fail under load.  So even if in future they did pivot to some other DA,  right now, today, their rep is on the line with the XRPL.  If it’s actually fragile then that’s a huge risk to go unaddressed.  

So although I don’t doubt that there was a low point of UNL validators at one moment, I can’t imagine they are now unaware of that potential issue.  So what explains their inaction?  That’s the puzzling bit.  
 

One possible scenario is that they have scripted failover stand-ins and replicated instances that can be stood up in short order if a loss of quorum were to approach.  Not saying they do, or that is likely,  I’m just pointing out that redundancy might be a quick script away at all times.


This honestly puzzles me because I believe you have identified an issue and yet there doesn’t seem to be a response to it.  That means to me that either:  it actually isn’t an issue,  or that they have a mitigator,  or they are blithely ignorant,  or that they really are indifferent to the XRPL.

The last two seem unlikely to me but then,  to a lesser extent,  so do the first two.  Maybe there is some other possibility I haven’t considered.

 

Here's the thing. (Again, just my perspective.) When we say that the XRPL is decentralized, it's not said with a sly wink. Ripple is no more responsible for the XRPL than you or I. People want to assume that Ripple will take care of the network, but Ripple has made no such commitment. If it existed, you would be able to find it and provide a link. People celebrate and cheer for DECENTRALIZATION every time Ripple removes one of their (high-end, production grade, expertly run) validators from the dUNL and replaces it with another. Again, people assume that Ripple is replacing their validators with similar quality validators run by competent people, but nope. The reason the network almost halted is because of the shitty validators that were added to the dUNL. The safety of the network mostly occurs in the topology. If there isn't sufficient overlap, and what is sufficient depends on the number and quality of other nodes (bad actors, etc), which is constantly changing and I don't know how the f*ck to figure that out at any given moment, but the consequence for getting it wrong is ending up on a different ledger than Ripple. Do you think Barb from Ohio, running a node in her living room, knows how to ensure a safe topology for the network? Let's hope so because she is absolutely dUNL material. Ripple removes their validators and replaces them with I don't know what. When the network almost halted and I saw what was on the dUNL, I assumed shitty nodes were added because there were no other choices. So I immediately jumped in with resources to try and help. ~$7k in hardware and $200/m at a data center to run the greatest validator known to man. And then I was excluded from the dUNL The subpar validators aren't on the dUNL because there are no other options, they are there because they've been hand-selected. And I am stunned. I have been XRP's fiercest supporter for almost 7 years. The irony wasn't lost on me that the person who argued the most that XRP wasn't permissioned was shutout by a gatekeeper on the first opportunity faster than you can say CENTRALIZATION. And I asked so many times what objective criteria is being used to select validators to add to the dUNL and I wasn't even worthy of a reply. 

 

And XRP supporters were SO HAPPY. Like "ha-ha, Ripple hates you, that's why you're excluded" because they are stupid and don't even know what they're celebrating. An attorney in this space told me that excluding me "is the kind of centralized management and control that implicates the securities laws." Why would Ripple do that???

And there is nobody to talk to because people either hate Ripple and can't discuss it rationally or love Ripple and also can't discuss it rationally. I beefed up my validator (I was running a hobbyst one) to help because I saw the condition of the network. And not only do XRP supporters think I'm lying (I've spent more than a year now talking about these problems only to have people message me wishing death upon my children), but they think the reason I am disturbed about being excluded from the dUNL is because I'm jealous. They are so out of their freaking delusional mind they think it's an honor for others to pay to process their transactions. :shock:

 

We not only lack sufficient infrastructure, but rather than discuss the dUNL or sufficient overlap, the best I've gotten from XRP supporters is "What's topology?"

If Ripple isn't adding competent people to the dUNL, who the hell is going help ensure a safe topology? 

Alloy is the best person to ask if you have questions, IMO.

Feel free to demand an explanation for the validators that have been added to the dUNL. It's unbelievable that this was a lone battle for me. 

Stellar has a somewhat comparable list to the dUNL, except they set a high bar and use strict, objective criteria. 

https://developers.stellar.org/docs/run-core-node/tier-1-orgs/

Edited by TiffanyHayden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, yxxyun said:

Clustering stock nodes validating txs,  validator for ordering. It is of course need higer hardware configuration when tpx increase.

That’s not really how clustering works, unfortunately. Clustering can help for some things, especially if you operate many servers as a group, but the performance gains as such are pretty small.

In the future, clustering may help with history sharding.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TiffanyHayden I understand your annoyance, you mentioned some important aspects. However, they aren't new. These aspects existed since I discovered XRPL years ago. Therefore, nothing has changed. I knew that situation when I started investing time into XRPL. I knew Ripple hold many coins. I knew there is no fund that just throws money to me. I knew nobody pays me for running a validator.
I have to insist politely, but if you expected something different, your expectations may just have been too optimistic. All your engagement (thanks!) was your personal decision. I for myself think most of the time, only the biggest player in an ecosystem is able to change the ecosystem. I never expected something else for XRPL.

@Dogowner5 I support your opinion that Ripple's reputation is on the line with the XRPL. Technically, I agree with Tiffany, but there are soft factors to consider. I think it would be risky to change the coin now. If you work with financial institution sooner or later you understand, that a lot is about trust, stability, regulatory and compliance. I assume financial institution wouldn't appreciate such a move.

If you read about early days of Facebook, Google+ and Twitter you discover, that hard competition leads to abrupt direction changes in companies. We are in a hard competition area. I assume, there are/were such situations too at Ripple. I don't assume everything just works easy peasy as planned months and years ago. As a startup, you have to react to unexpected situations quickly and have to be agile. Most important topics have top priority. They may change quite fast after an important meeting with a potential customer. In a shorter-term view, establishing an ecosystem rarely has that top priority.
I for myself accept that behavior. I never expected something else. Nobody ever promised me something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jerrybo said:

However, they aren't new. These aspects existed since I discovered XRPL years ago.

WRONG. We were on the fabulous 5 up until not long ago. If you had any sort of fundamental understanding of the network or its evolution, you’d know what that means and what commitments weren’t kept. 

I’ve been here from the beginning and I waited out the fab 5, the ONLY 5 validators that mattered, gated, run by Ripple, completely centralized with the promise it was necessary to keep the network safe and to prepare for decentralization, so that there would be tools and procedures and a process for safely removing Ripple’s validators and selecting independent nodes. 

The rest of your post illustrates the lack of base knowledge and misguided beliefs that lead to this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://eosuk.io/eos-block-producer-technical-specifications/

https://support.bitfinex.com/hc/en-us/articles/360005290174-Bitfinex-EOS-Block-Producer-Candidate-Report

there are some EOS block producer(super node, like the dUNL validator) specification,  they need voted to become the block producer.  EOS claims higher TPS than XRPL.

of course in EOS become a block producer will get high incentive.

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.