Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

Further investigation seems to contradict what you have said about Libra not having counter party.  I guess the it is probably leveraged from assets.  I don't get who covers losses in the system when the values in basket of currencies do not add up with currency fluctuations in the real world.  They must have covered this aspect somehow, but I cannot imagine how.

It depends on the definition of counterparty. For sure there is not a single entity which default will cause the coin to collapse. Even if one of more "partners" of the reserve default, the coin will still exists since it's decentralized and will be tradeable, reedeemable etc. MAYBE the price of the coin can be affected in case of default of some entities of the reserve but it's hard to say since it's a completely new model.

5 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

It will be centralised with a limited number of nodes distributed between investor who each contribute 10 million

Why centralized? You said yourself there are multiple nodes :).

It's no different to XRP. There is a "limited" set of validators which make the network decentralized. If you assume XRP is decentralized then it's exactly the same for Libra. It's limited (100-150 nodes, not 2-3) because of limitation of the consensus algorithm, but it's exactly the same with XRP. XRPL consensus cannot handle thousands of validators.

5 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

I do not really understand finance at this level, it just all looks opaque, closed, incestuous and hidden in a labyrinth of unanswered questions that are hard to pin down

Nobody knows since it's a completely new model. We can't know in advance the behavior of this kind of system. IMO the coin price will depend on fluctuations of the underlying basket of currencies, but at the same time I don't see why it won't depend by supply and demand market. After all it's NOT PEGGED to any currency, so there is not a fixed price to redeem the currency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

It is a Stable Coin backed by assets (Counter party) and controlled by a closed group of  businesses who will make money out of their ownership of  assets

Quote

The Libra Association is an independent, not-for-profit membership organization, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland.

Quote

The Libra Association is made up of a group of diverse organizations from around the world. The Founding Members of the association each run one of the validator nodes that form the network that operates the Libra Blockchain. One of the association's directives will be to work with the community to research and implement the transition to a permissionless network over time.

It's not "Facebook's friends". There are private companies, payment companies, FIs, telecomunication companies, not-for-profit organizations, universities....to me way better than XRP's idea of becoming only a tool for FIs.

Edited by tulo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Libra is designed to directly compete with main world fiat currencies within their own areas of interest, while RippleNet+ODL is helping fiat currencies to achieve crypto-like features in terms of speed and cost of exchange. 

Maybe they will try to launch Libra on some markets in 2021, but I simply don't see how this concept could become mainstream on a worldwide scale. 

 

@tulo, I don't need to study that whitepaper to see the big picture. Diving into much technical details in this case actually distracts you from seeing what's really important. It may give you some edge in nitpicking over tiny details, but that's basically all. 

Libra is not going to happen.

Are you ready to take the McAfee's challenge here? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Duke67 said:

@tulo, I don't need to study that whitepaper to see the big picture. Diving into much technical details in this case actually distracts you from seeing what's really important. It may give you some edge in nitpicking over tiny details, but that's basically all. 

Libra is not going to happen.

Are you ready to take the McAfee's challenge here? :)

What is the big picture? :) 

I also think Libra won't happen now. The world is not ready. But a Libra 2.0 will happen sooner or later.

The world is not ready yet to think globally. We still have nationalisms, borders, wars , huge economical discrepancies around the world. Probably to start thinking as humans and not as Chinese Americans French and so on, we'd need a common enemy. Aliens maybe? :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me crazy but I think FB will join XRP ecosystem sooner or later and overall Libra project was intended  just to increase awareness and wake up regulatory entities. :dirol:

Edited by Spartaksus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tulo said:

It's not "Facebook's friends". There are private companies, payment companies, FIs, telecomunication companies, not-for-profit organizations, universities....to me way better than XRP's idea of becoming only a tool for FIs.

Now you are saying it has a different use case to XRP.  I would agree, one is a stable coin with counter party the other is a digital cross border asset without counter party.  The two systems interact with each other.  XRP is more unique, Libra's uniqueness is being tied to a basket of currecnies.  Libra is a closed garden competing with other digital fiats, the other is an enabler of cross border transactions.

A you say Libra is many years behind XRP.

Libra is disproportionately controlled by Facebook, and at first will be extremely centralised and may always be controlled by a few investors.  XRP is very decentralised and no longer controlled by Ripple although Ripple have a huge stake though its ownership of escrowed coins and it historic position as the main developer of the ecosystem.

Share this post


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

Call me crazy but I think FB will join XRP ecosystem sooner or later and overall Libra project was intended  just to increase awareness and wake up regulatory entities. :dirol:

Far from crazy... The race is truly on, XRP has been held back waiting for Regulatory clarity to have any sort of mass adoption by the Public & Financial Institutions.  In a Regulatory sense XRP is way ahead of the Libra project which may take Years to pass the SEC.s and other Financial regulatory bodies scrutiny.  This opens the door even wider for the Zerp to win the race .  :beach:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, tulo said:

 

  • On paper better possible performances than XRP

I have found zero technical information, data, test models, or even an explanation from any source to even remotely draw the above conclusion. Can you sight a source of information comparing the performance of Libra vs Ripple network? 
 

Sh*t, every white paper reads like the road to el dorado. At this point white papers are as weak a talk. There is a ocean of failed crypto start ups that had nicely worded white papers - yet nothing left of them. 
 

Also just because Facebook is behind this does not guarantee it’s success. Not even close. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

I would agree, one is a stable coin with counter party the other is a digital cross border asset without counter party.

They are both with counterparty or both without, depends on the point of view. XRP has counterparty too if you consider that some of the validators could fail and make a network failure.

3 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

Libra is disproportionately controlled by Facebook, and at first will be extremely centralised and may always be controlled by a few investors.

Why? Where do you read this? It's exactly as XRP. The network is controlled by validators-like parties.

1 hour ago, Palerider said:

have found zero technical information, data, test models, or even an explanation from any source to even remotely draw the above conclusion. Can you sight a source of information comparing the performance of Libra vs Ripple network? 

  • LibraBFT is more scalable in terms of numbers of validators, because the leader mechanics greatly reduces the number of communication links.
  • If there are 10F validators, LibraBFT only requires 6F+1 good validators to have liveness and safety properties, while XRP consensus requires 8F good validators.
  • LibraBFT directly takes into account a delay threshold in communications to ensure robustness. There is no proof of robustness under delayed communication in XRP.

Just to name a few...source: https://developers.libra.org/docs/assets/papers/libra-consensus-state-machine-replication-in-the-libra-blockchain.pdf

Edited by tulo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, tulo said:

 

Quote

Why centralized? You said yourself there are multiple nodes :).

I am not an expert, but this is what I understand:

From what I can see the Libra nodes are distributed between the investors who own the assets - that is a closed garden and yes essentially centralised control.

I have never heard that XRP has a limit to the number of validators although I do know they have a recommended set.  This recommended set is not taken from investors owning the assets behind XRP because XRP is not underwritten like a stable coin.  XRP's value is pure derived from utility value of the token.

They are very different products and maybe some banks which deal with just a few corridors between say America, the EU and Japan may use Libra, but I don't think that is what Libra is designed for.  I guess Libra is being sold as a retail coin for Facebook users.

XRP is being marketed as a cross border DA for use by FIs and banks

Share this post


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

I am not an expert, but this is what I understand:

From what I can see the Libra nodes are distributed between the investors who own the assets - that is a closed garden and yes essentially centralised control.

I have never heard that XRP has a limit to the number of validators although I do know they have a recommended set.  This recommended set is not taken from investors owning the assets behind XRP because XRP is not underwritten like a stable coin.  XRP's value is pure derived from utility value of the token.

They are very different products and maybe some banks which deal with just a few corridors between say America, the EU and Japan may use Libra, but I don't think that is what Libra is designed for.  I guess Libra is being sold as a retail coin for Facebook users.

XRP is being marketed as a cross border DA for use by FIs and banks

In Libra there are basically:

  • Multiple entities running validator-like nodes. Those entities are decided by an association which includes many parties (private companies, universities, FIs, ...). Probably the members itself of the association will run the nodes, but this is not yet clear. It's very similar to XRP, the difference is that Libra is saying explicitly that in the first 5 years it will be a permissioned network, where the permission to join the network is decided by this association (which is not that bad IMO). XRP is theoretically permissionless, but actually everyont is using the same UNL list provided by a single company (Ripple). Also Ripple owns 20%+ of validators which allows them to stop the network progression whenever they want. So on the paper it's better XRP, but on the practice it's worst right now. Also Libra said that when the technology will be ready (5 years) they'll switch to a permissionless network.
  • There are sort of authorized gateways which act as a bridge between FIAT and Libra. They'll also act as custodians for Libra reserve. I see nothing bad in this, unless the requirements to become a gateway are too strict.

 

They are of course different products, or at least they are sold as different products, but basically they offer the same features (more or less), so the crypto itself can be one or another to serve the same scope. Libra could be used as bridge currency and XRP could be used as global currency and vice versa. It's all the ecosystem around them that will bias the use cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tulo said:

In Libra there are basically:

  • Multiple entities running validator-like nodes. Those entities are decided by an association which includes many parties (private companies, universities, FIs, ...). Probably the members itself of the association will run the nodes, but this is not yet clear. It's very similar to XRP, the difference is that Libra is saying explicitly that in the first 5 years it will be a permissioned network, where the permission to join the network is decided by this association (which is not that bad IMO). XRP is theoretically permissionless, but actually everyont is using the same UNL list provided by a single company (Ripple). Also Ripple owns 20%+ of validators which allows them to stop the network progression whenever they want. So on the paper it's better XRP, but on the practice it's worst right now. Also Libra said that when the technology will be ready (5 years) they'll switch to a permissionless network.
  • There are sort of authorized gateways which act as a bridge between FIAT and Libra. They'll also act as custodians for Libra reserve. I see nothing bad in this, unless the requirements to become a gateway are too strict.

 

They are of course different products, or at least they are sold as different products, but basically they offer the same features (more or less), so the crypto itself can be one or another to serve the same scope. Libra could be used as bridge currency and XRP could be used as global currency and vice versa. It's all the ecosystem around them that will bias the use cases.

thanks, that's an education.  We are not far off being on the same page

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2019 at 7:45 PM, KarlHungus said:

I know BoE is assumed to be tied to Ripple, but Carney apparently spoke very highly of Libra.

Ripple is one of the parties that BoE is working with. BoE wants a level playing field and want to enable a system with multiple players in the market.

Ripple is one of them and it's not exclusive. Have you been listening to youtubers that claim Ripple will rule everything? This is way more risky than many are claiming (talking about XRP mainly here).

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...