Charting the course of XRP

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Troote said:

Why is that a good news? I am not really looking forward to seeing Ripple wiggle out of this lawsuit because of technicalities. If they are truly guilty of what they are accused of, I actually want Ripple to lose and be permanently stopped from abusing investors.

If the lawsuit concludes without actually addressing the accusations that the SEC raised, I would qualify this as a bad news rather than a good one.

Frankly I think that’s the likely scenario. A settlement or a win on Fair Notice. I personally don’t see why this defence is a technicality.

If the former commissioners claimed ETH, which has raised money through a public ICO, dumped on investors at the peak of last bull cycle (as confessed by Vitalik), demonstrated complete centralised control of the network when they did a hard fork during the hack, how is that not going to be perceived as anything other than lack of fair notice ? 

Again, I’m not defending Ripple here. Just that the law better apply uniformly across all crypto. If not, there’s going to be a lot of lawsuits against the SEC.

[Troote]

6 minutes ago, Ripley said:

Frankly I think that’s the likely scenario. A settlement or a win on Fair Notice. I personally don’t see why this defence is a technicality.

If the former commissioners claimed ETH, which has raised money through a public ICO, dumped on investors at the peak of last bull cycle (as confessed by Vitalik), demonstrated complete centralised control of the network when they did a hard fork during the hack, how is that not going to be perceived as anything other than lack of fair notice ? 

Again, I’m not defending Ripple here. Just that the law better apply uniformly across all crypto. If not, there’s going to be a lot of lawsuits against the SEC.

I agree. I am not defending the SEC either. If they are as crooked as they seem, they need a good kick in the *ss too.

Ultimately if this whole sh*tshow leads to a status quo with no progress in terms of regulations or on the fundamental aspects of the lawsuit, then we all lose. Others will continue doing the same thing in the future and the crypto world will remain rotten with scams for a long time.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Troote

[Neurotoxin]

22 minutes ago, retep said:

i thought that the word "ur" was slang for "your" so that why i was confused.  

Indeed it is. In this case I was using it as a possessive pronoun. 

 

23 minutes ago, Troote said:

I guess I am not a blind fan-fish. I support the XRP Ledger. Not Ripple.

And that’s perfectly valid. I respect your opinion. I just don’t share it. 
 

I, on the other hand, want Ripple to win all the way and hope both parties can reach a settlement that’s beneficial for everybody. I have no personal grudges against Ripple, but I do have negative feelings towards the SEC. 

 

27 minutes ago, Troote said:

If the lawsuit concludes without actually addressing the accusations that the SEC raised, I would qualify this as a bad news rather than a good one. I don't understand the irrational and unwavering support that Ripple enjoys from XRP investors.

There is space for all of this being addressed in a settlement even if Ripple gets a win in many aspects. I don’t see what the problem with supporting Ripple is. It seems you have a problem with other people supporting Ripple. You can dislike em all you want, but you can’t force people into seeing things your way. We all have different viewpoints and opinions and there is no single, supreme one. It is what it is, let people have their own opinions without it affecting your mood so much. You’ll be a lot less stressed for it. 

[Neurotoxin]

14 minutes ago, Troote said:

Ultimately if this whole sh*tshow leads to a status quo with no progress in terms of regulations or on the fundamental aspects of the lawsuit, then we all lose. Others will continue doing the same thing in the future and the crypto world will remain rotten with scams for a long time.

I agree, and I think that’s where congress needs to step in and legislation needs to take place to put clear guidelines and regulations in effect. I just don’t think the right approach is being taken. It seems as if we’re gonna get regulation through enforcement and litigation as opposed to regulation via legislation. I’d much prefer the latter. It would be much more efficient to write clear rules for all to follow than individually attacking companies one by one without even having new laws planned out and set in stone so we don’t have scammers set up shop in the first place. I mean come on, cumrocket (and many others like it)? Clearly a joke with no usecase other than being a ponzi. 

[Troote]

10 minutes ago, Neurotoxin said:

... 

Just lol. If you could focus on facts and leave your understanding about my mindset, stress levels and other BS out of the discussion, that would help lift the level of the debate, don't you think? 

[Neurotoxin]

54 minutes ago, Troote said:

Just lol. If you could focus on facts and leave your understanding about my mindset, stress levels and other BS out of the discussion, that would help lift the level of the debate, don't you think? 

Not sure, but you always seem to be in a bad mood. Perhaps if you came here in a less emotional state, your mood swings wouldn’t cloud your judgment when it comes time to responding to others in the forum. 

Edited June 15, 2021 by Neurotoxin
I’m referring to the often condescending tone in Troote’s posts.

[xrp-nuke]

1 hour ago, Troote said:

Why is that a good news? I am not really looking forward to seeing Ripple wiggle out of this lawsuit because of technicalities. If they are truly guilty of what they are accused of, I actually want Ripple to lose, pay very dearly for what they have done to us and be permanently stopped from abusing investors ever again.

If the lawsuit concludes without actually addressing the accusations that the SEC raised, I would qualify this as a bad news rather than a good one. I don't understand the irrational and unwavering support that Ripple enjoys from XRP investors.

I guess I am not a blind fan-fish. I support the XRP Ledger. Not Ripple.

SEC drags all attention, meanwhile Ripple continues do less or nothing for XRP and XRPL adoption, the grants is like xPring 2.0

Meanwhile ODL dead (show me data), DEX is in nowhere, NFT some day with NDA grants, Stablecoin end up in tutorial "DIY", Smart Contracts a.k.a. Codius is MVP from 2018, R3 got 1B and? XRPL Private will stays Private behind 7 seals sprinkled with NDAs.

So, SEC wins and Ripple will play victim saying that ir ruines it live.

Ripple wins, it will blame SEC for years of damage.

But, crypto moves and Ripple indeed lost everything it promised it will do in 2020 and beyond.

Last thing I see David atacking Uniswap decentralisation, meanwhile Ripple and et al sit on default UNL list.

 

[Troote]

35 minutes ago, Neurotoxin said:

Not sure, but you always seem to be in a bad mood. Perhaps if you came here in a less emotional state, your mood swings wouldn’t cloud your judgment when it comes time to responding to others in the forum. 

And I will keep being condescending towards you for as long as you continue posting nonsensical garbage like this. You should take note of @xrp-nuke, he raises good questions and cuts through the fairy dust. Something you should do more of.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, xrp-nuke said:

SEC drags all attention, meanwhile Ripple continues do less or nothing for XRP and XRPL adoption, the grants is like xPring 2.0

Meanwhile ODL dead (show me data), DEX is in nowhere, NFT some day with NDA grants, Stablecoin end up in tutorial "DIY", Smart Contracts a.k.a. Codius is MVP from 2018, R3 got 1B and? XRPL Private will stays Private behind 7 seals sprinkled with NDAs.

So, SEC wins and Ripple will play victim saying that ir ruines it live.

Ripple wins, it will blame SEC for years of damage.

But, crypto moves and Ripple indeed lost everything it promised it will do in 2020 and beyond.

Last thing I see David atacking Uniswap decentralisation, meanwhile Ripple and et al sit on default UNL list.

 

If Ripple did anything explicit for retail XRPL adoption, they would be violating securities laws in the US. A fully decentralised network needs to attract developers without a central authority prodding or incentivising them. They did a lot of things right and still got sued. Wait until the SEC goes after the other networks. 

Ripple has not had a majority in their own UNL for more than two years. As recently as a few weeks ago, a lot of prominent nodes moved away from Ripple’s UNL to a different one. XRPL consensus is fully decentralised and I’d like to be proven why XRPL is still considered centralised.

You, I, or anyone here can fork XRPL and start our own network. It can be private or public. We can create our own UNL. The trick is to convince others to agree with us. But it’s still possible. With v3, you cannot do the same with Uniswap. That’s what makes it not decentralised. It’s not wrong and they have very strong business reasons to be this way. Why should all products on a decentralised platform be decentralised themselves ? That’s not practical. Xumm is a closed source wallet on XRPL. But calling it decentralised when it isn’t anymore is hypocritical. David isn’t mischaracterising anything.

Edit: Based on further verification, Xumm is indeed open source so that’s not a good example. But the point remains. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Ripley

[Neurotoxin]

2 hours ago, Troote said:

And I will keep being condescending towards you for as long as you continue posting nonsensical garbage like this. You should take note of @xrp-nuke, he raises good questions and cuts through the fairy dust. Something you should do more of.

Ok

[xrp_sea]

30 minutes ago, Neurotoxin said:

Ok

I would recommend blocking Troote like I did a while back. He has diarrhea of the mouth and generally has nothing intelligent to add to the discussion. Unless, you like reading ***-for-tat BS.

Edited June 16, 2021 by xrp_sea

[xrp-nuke]

2 hours ago, Ripley said:

If Ripple did anything explicit for retail XRPL adoption, they would be violating securities laws in the US. A fully decentralised network needs to attract developers without a central authority prodding or incentivising them. They did a lot of things right and still got sued. Wait until the SEC goes after the other networks. 

Key point, they did almost nothing to attract developers meanwhile sitting on pile of billions of XRP and selling millions each month. They did also a lot of things wrong and lost leadership.

2 hours ago, Ripley said:

Ripple has not had a majority in their own UNL for more than two years. As recently as a few weeks ago, a lot of prominent nodes moved away from Ripple’s UNL to a different one. XRPL consensus is fully decentralised and I’d like to be proven why XRPL is still considered centralised.

When I look to UNL, I see Ripple, I see Ripple sponsored companies and I see names that has nothing to do with XRP or XRPL, so, why would I choose them? I am sure that Ripples and affiliates lists are 90% identical. The list itself is sourced from Ripple or affiliates.

To claim decentralisation, I want at least one company that has nothing to do with Ripple, that is interested in maintaining XRPL and has a solid stake to keep it alive and healthy.

So, by design it can be decentralised by current state of things its theater of "decentralisation", but not the fact.

2 hours ago, Ripley said:

You, I, or anyone here can fork XRPL and start our own network. It can be private or public. We can create our own UNL. The trick is to convince others to agree with us. But it’s still possible. With v3, you cannot do the same with Uniswap. That’s what makes it not decentralised. It’s not wrong and they have very strong business reasons to be this way. Why should all products on a decentralised platform be decentralised themselves ? That’s not practical. Xumm is a closed source wallet on XRPL. But calling it decentralised when it isn’t anymore is hypocritical. David isn’t mischaracterising anything

I am sure David smart enough to recognise where XRPL is truly decentralised and where it is free it is not so decentralised. The say "XRPL can live without Ripple" is true as long as Westie has enough funds from his pockets to sponsor wooden box with XRPL but can he fight Sybil atack alone? How long the guys will run nodes without Ripple? 

A lot of questions unanswered.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, xrp-nuke said:

Key point, they did almost nothing to attract developers meanwhile sitting on pile of billions of XRP and selling millions each month. They did also a lot of things wrong and lost leadership.

When I look to UNL, I see Ripple, I see Ripple sponsored companies and I see names that has nothing to do with XRP or XRPL, so, why would I choose them? I am sure that Ripples and affiliates lists are 90% identical. The list itself is sourced from Ripple or affiliates.

To claim decentralisation, I want at least one company that has nothing to do with Ripple, that is interested in maintaining XRPL and has a solid stake to keep it alive and healthy.

So either claim that Ripple incentivises developers to build on XRPL through grants snd investments, who then run the network or claim that they don’t incentivise developers and so the developers are running the nodes for their own benefit. You can’t have both. 

Show me how Cardano and other proof of stake networks have people “selflessly” run nodes. They don’t. They all get sponsored, but get called “staking rewards”. What is a staking reward ? It’s inbuilt inflation powered by retail money on the promise of future value. Take away the reward and who runs those nodes ? The difference is that those rewards come at the expense of asset concentration and eventually control of the network because that’s what most proof of stake rewards systems are. 

I’d much rather have developers incentivised to build on XRPL through VC money, rather than ponzi giveaways built on the backs of retail investors that ultimately compromise the decentralisation of consensus that are proof of stake rewards systems.

Flare got a recent 11.6M round of funding that includes Charlie Lee as an investor. What’s next ? Flare is really LiteCoin owned ?

Edited June 16, 2021 by Ripley

[PlanK]

2 hours ago, xrp-nuke said:

To claim decentralisation, I want at least one company that has nothing to do with Ripple, that is interested in maintaining XRPL and has a solid stake to keep it alive and healthy.

 

What sort of mythical company would have a solid stake in XRPL but also have nothing to do with Ripple and their products?

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, PlanK said:

 

What sort of mythical company would have a solid stake in XRPL but also have nothing to do with Ripple and their products?

He’s right on saying there should be. Ripple is not XRPL. There are exchanges (Gatehub), wallet platforms and other businesses that run on XRPL that aren’t Ripple related though - Deaton’s petition to join the lawsuit has a non-exhaustive list. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Ripley