Jump to content

USA FED CBDC is likely building on Ethereum....all boils down to politics and winner picking.


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, DannyRipple said:

Fvck Gensler and the SEC. This is rediculous how the US is sabotaging an American business that is capable of being the industry leader. @GaryGensler is a travesty to representation of The USA

Don't be so hard on the guy. He has to play his part. He knows the truth, he just has to beat around the bush to satisfy the incumbents who pay for sh!t, aka the money center banks who are best served to take advantage of the XRPL'S consensus UNL methods if they want to extend their power into the future monetary infrastructure's topology. 

I get that they want to defend short term profits, but I disrespect the decision to take short term profit over national security, and (if we are talking straight up Shareholder Value) sacrificing longterm enterprise value for giving China a bite of the apple.

That's stupid.

Edited by KarmaCoverage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KarmaCoverage said:

Don't fool yourself, the art of war has many manifestations.

I try not to fool myself.  And yeah I know full well that govts wrestle in currency wars.  But the claim was that “US Government is playing along with Ripple in a very classified case that involves national security.”

 

And the basis for this was?

I’m tired of this site entertaining unsupported conspiracy theories.  Where is the evidence that the US govt is playing with Ripple in a very classified case?

You might as well believe in the Lizard People.  There is the same amount of evidence.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BillyOckham said:

And the basis for this was?

There is no explicit basis. The only hope is that (let's lower the expectations) Congress will do what's best for America.

I don't have high hopes. But I know what's right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, KarmaCoverage said:

There is no explicit basis. The only hope is that (let's lower the expectations) Congress will do what's best for America.

I don't have high hopes. But I know what's right.

See I can agree with all that.  It’s silly conspiracy theories that have zero evidence that I take exception to.  Just because we want to believe something doesn’t make it true.

Anyone can make up scenarios but without any evidence they have no value and actually do readers of this site a disservice.  Hopium is a joke word but it does apply to anything that we would like to be true but that has zero evidence to support it.

Lets stick to what is provably true or at the very least have some visible dots that might connect.  To my way of thinking it’s fine to point to those dots and say they might be connected.

But whole conspiracy made from absolutely nothing but a hope is really not helpful and could be harmful if deluded idiots believe it.  That’s why I ask ‘On what basis?’ when I see something totally unsupported by evidence or even dots to indicate it’s possible truth.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, KarmaCoverage said:

@BillyOckham watch the two videos I posted above. *My words are my own.

Know I am anti Hopium (a word coined by @galgitron )

But sir, with respect, the fact that countries fight to protect and push their own currencies doesn’t provide any indication or evidence that Ripple and the government are in a secret classified case together.

And nah, I haven’t watched the videos.  I don’t generally watch these things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2021 at 9:46 AM, StanleyXRP said:

that is exactly why I felt there is no free market competition. Those people use the power givern by the people to pick a winner in one of the most important industries to just serve their own interest.

There is fire in my heart seeing how these people bully Ripple and retail investors.

 

Maybe it can be seen in a lighter way. There are thousands of crypto currencies out there right now. I saw a number saying over 10,000 at this point, but no idea if it is accurate. The SEC is challenging Ripple with the intent to set some sort of legal precedent that makes some sense in their view. But that action is aimed at establishing principles in the market and is not about choosing between two currencies. I'm not taking a view on the merits of their position, but just giving the staff (although maybe not all of the SEC Commissioners) the benefit of the doubt to believe that they are mostly decent people trying to do their jobs well.

And I would also argue that there is tons of free market competition happening right now as evidenced by the number of cryptos out there and how the relative market cap has changed over the last few years between cryptos. The biggest thing limiting fair competition on a daily basis is the comparative lack of transparency in crypto markets and the ability of traders to take sizeable enough positions to move markets and, sometimes, collude. I don't know that I could say those things are explicitly illegal, but they certainly aren't "fair" to the average retail investor. 

There will also come a point where the US government builds a digital dollar and they will choose a single primary chain to build on and/or work with. In that case, they will be choosing a winner for hosting the digital dollar, but that is no different from any other choice to build or purchase something. When you build a bridge, you don't try to divide the task equally amongst all of the construction companies in the country. You hire one and work with the ecosystem of service providers associated with them to deliver the project. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BillyOckham said:

And nah, I haven’t watched the videos.  I don’t generally watch these things.

One is me talking about China's efforts with ETH/BTC (PoW chains) vs the USD.

The other is a mock government currency war, and Gary Gensler plays a role in the exercise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just my 2 cents.... To my (limited) understanding it doesn't really matter if a CDBC is build on XRPL tech. Even if a CDBC is build on RippleNet, it will not use XRP....  The main role for XRP (and where it is very good in) comes with cross border payments and trustles settlement from one currency to another
And .... AFAIK XRPL can do this for other networks using the interledger protocol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I may push back a bit on a few statements:

Quote

The SEC is challenging Ripple with the intent to set some sort of legal precedent that makes some sense in their view. But that action is aimed at establishing principles in the market and is not about choosing between two currencies. I'm not taking a view on the merits of their position, but just giving the staff (although maybe not all of the SEC Commissioners) the benefit of the doubt to believe that they are mostly decent people trying to do their jobs well.

I agree with most of what you have articulated here, however, I disagree in-part. It's true that there are reasonable SEC officials/staff who are trying to do the best they can given the the most recent and the current SEC leadership's guidance.  However, to say that this was an honest lawsuit brought against Ripple to set some mediocre precedent, I believe, is a grossly inaccurate. There's too much evidence that point to nefarious actors both inside and outside the SEC: 

If the SEC truly wanted to set precedence then they should've file a lawsuit against the entity that actually had an ICO (i.e. Ethereum Foundation). It's my opinion that this lawsuit was a weapon used to thwart Ripple's growth in the US and abroad. 

Quote

And I would also argue that there is tons of free market competition happening right now as evidenced by the number of cryptos out there and how the relative market cap has changed over the last few years between cryptos.

The argument isn't that the industry is lacking a plethora of cutting-edge blockchain/fintech platforms competing with one another, but that the rules are/have been skewed in favor of a select few (two to be more specific, BTC and ETH) here in the US. I can only imagine the number of US-based partnerships Ripple would have if XRP had the same clarity as BTC and ETH, better yet, the level of institutional adoption of the XRPL. I think the saving grace for Ripple in this scenario is that the SEC did wait until 2020 to bring this lawsuit against the company. I say this because Ripple has spent the better part of 9 years working hand-in-hand with regulators from around the world. Foreign regulators and CB officials were able to see this law suit for the BS that it was. This 9-year history of collaboration between Ripple's leadership and policy/regulatory regime with foreign regulators essentially took the sting out of the the lawsuit and isolated the fall-out to that of the US only. 

Edited by King34Maine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, kanaas said:

Just my 2 cents.... To my (limited) understanding it doesn't really matter if a CDBC is build on XRPL tech. Even if a CDBC is build on RippleNet, it will not use XRP....  The main role for XRP (and where it is very good in) comes with cross border payments and trustles settlement from one currency to another
And .... AFAIK XRPL can do this for other networks using the interledger protocol

I disagree here. The transference of CBDCs from different countries is still a cross-border transactions and is no different than retail/consumer-based cross-border transactions. @JoelKatz & @hammertoe talked about how XRP could be used via the private ledgers:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, King34Maine said:

If I may push back a bit on a few statements:

I agree with most of what you have articulated here, however, I disagree in-part. It's true that there are reasonable SEC officials/staff who are trying to do the best they can given the the most recent and the current SEC leadership's guidance.  However, to say that this was an honest lawsuit brought against Ripple to set some mediocre precedent, I believe, is a grossly inaccurate. There's too much evidence that point to nefarious actors both inside and outside the SEC: 

If the SEC truly wanted to set precedence then they should've file a lawsuit against the entity that actually had an ICO (i.e. Ethereum Foundation). It's my opinion that this lawsuit was a weapon used to thwart Ripple's growth in the US and abroad. 

The argument isn't that the industry is lacking a plethora of cutting-edge blockchain/fintech platforms competing with one another, but that the rules are/have been skewed in favor of a select few (two to be more specific, BTC and ETH) here in the US. I can only imagine the number of US-based partnerships Ripple would have if XRP had the same clarity as BTC and ETH, better yet, the level of institutional adoption of the XRPL. I think the saving grace for Ripple in this scenario is that the SEC did wait until 2020 to bring this lawsuit against the company. I say this because Ripple has spent the better part of 9 years working hand-in-hand with regulators from around the world. Foreign regulators and CB officials were able to see this law suit for the BS that it was. This 9-year history of collaboration between Ripple's leadership and policy/regulatory regime with foreign regulators essentially took the sting out of the the lawsuit and isolated the fall-out to that of the US only. 

I could agree with a fair bit of your point of view. The absolute best that one could say about an SEC Commissioner launching a lawsuit on his way out the door and immediately taking on jobs for crypto players is that it demonstrates bad judgment. That's the absolute best. I do think that there was some sincerity at the institutional level to establish some precedents, but a poor choice of where to start. I am not so convinced that BTC is the darling of US government institutions, but who knows. I am not in Washington or in the minds of these people and only have time to read articles from time-to-time. I also can't say that I am very inspired by many of the leading individuals on either side of the table in this case and wish that everyone else was not simply turned into collateral damage in this process.

On the comment about CBDCs above, I am still struggling to see a role for XRP in a world of CBDCs. The BIS has been supporting a pilot project that has achieved cross-border payments without XRP or the equivalent to my understanding by linking domestic fast payment systems. It would probably be more efficient to make use of something like XRP, but it seems that there are ways for these systems to link directly. I hope that there is a role for XRP (rather than just Ripple products), but it remains unclear to me that there indeed will be one.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, I suppose the video's editor just searched up "cryptocurrency coin" and ethereum showed up, nothing new here.

Using the ethereum network is not efficient nor safe for international payments, they have a bad consensus mechanism compared to XRPL's consensus mechanism.

The Bitcoin Network and The Ethereum Network's consensus protocol/network is scaled to be centralized.

The XRP Ledger's consensus protocol/network is scaled to be decentralized, everyone can participate and share a fair amount of consensus power with every validator in the UNL list no matter how scaled/large the network is.

Edited by wojake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Treehouse said:

 

Maybe it can be seen in a lighter way. There are thousands of crypto currencies out there right now. I saw a number saying over 10,000 at this point, but no idea if it is accurate. The SEC is challenging Ripple with the intent to set some sort of legal precedent that makes some sense in their view. But that action is aimed at establishing principles in the market and is not about choosing between two currencies. I'm not taking a view on the merits of their position, but just giving the staff (although maybe not all of the SEC Commissioners) the benefit of the doubt to believe that they are mostly decent people trying to do their jobs well.

And I would also argue that there is tons of free market competition happening right now as evidenced by the number of cryptos out there and how the relative market cap has changed over the last few years between cryptos. The biggest thing limiting fair competition on a daily basis is the comparative lack of transparency in crypto markets and the ability of traders to take sizeable enough positions to move markets and, sometimes, collude. I don't know that I could say those things are explicitly illegal, but they certainly aren't "fair" to the average retail investor. 

There will also come a point where the US government builds a digital dollar and they will choose a single primary chain to build on and/or work with. In that case, they will be choosing a winner for hosting the digital dollar, but that is no different from any other choice to build or purchase something. When you build a bridge, you don't try to divide the task equally amongst all of the construction companies in the country. You hire one and work with the ecosystem of service providers associated with them to deliver the project. 

 

you have completely ignored the freedom of making investments. People are adults, they are responsible for their own decision in making their own investment. Government shall only come to intervene the capital market when unfair competition exists. If the general public believe that the lack of transparency has greatly jeopardized the crypto market, then the crypto market would not grow byself. Anyhting that is not self-sustainable will not last long, just as what ponzi-scheme does in history. It is not up to the SEC to decide what is approriate for the market and what is not, particularly so in the arena of innovation, where new money and wealth could be generated and new opportunity arises for the people to succeed. I assume you have not looked into the Ethereum and Ripple story and mistaking SEC's current action as benign protection for the investors. Your narrative simply does not fit and is not supported in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, kanaas said:

Just my 2 cents.... To my (limited) understanding it doesn't really matter if a CDBC is build on XRPL tech. Even if a CDBC is build on RippleNet, it will not use XRP....  The main role for XRP (and where it is very good in) comes with cross border payments and trustles settlement from one currency to another
And .... AFAIK XRPL can do this for other networks using the interledger protocol

True!

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.