Jump to content


Ripple

ripple

  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

#61 bo shen

bo shen

    Member

  • Former Member
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • LocationAtlanta, Georgia; Shanghai, China.

Posted 07 May 2013 - 09:56 PM

I got some ripples on hand, please post your ripple address on the forum if any one want Ripples to test the system !

Cheers.

#62 Brian Goss

Brian Goss

    Member

  • Lifetime
  • Pip
  • 1,268 posts
  • LocationRochester, MN

Posted 07 May 2013 - 10:03 PM

View PostJeff Coleman, on 12 April 2013 - 06:08 AM, said:

Yeah, finally went ahead and signed up for this after watching it for a little while.  My address is rB4zJjccQoTwWKciXPDetGzUrWK4o7nfuP in case someone wants to give me some so I can play around.  The p2p trust thing seems like basically a technical implementation of hawala but with the possibility for much longer chains, which I am skeptical of for reasons I'll get to.  The gateways version seems like it will be equivalent in value to the trustability of the gateways.  The consensus model probably needs strictly less trust than the networks themselves so it seems like a reasonable way to go for a method that requires a nontrivial amount of trust anyways--performance characteristics look decent.

Here's a scenario that concerns me, however:  Person A trusts B who trusts C who trusts D and so on up to Z.  A sends Z an IOU for $100.  A week later, Z needs the hundred dollars and goes to Y saying "cash now pls."  Y says, "sure no prob, let me just grab it from X".  The next day Y goes to X and says "hey can I grab that hundy?" and X says, "definitely, I'll just get in touch with W".

Eventually, 25 days after Z needed the money, B is telling A "yo, I just need to grab that hundred bucks from you" and A says "well this is awkward b/c I'm actually broke right now...you know I'm good for it right?".  tl;dr B through Y are being made to have socially awkward conversations because of what A and Z did.  And here's the root problem--although I would definitely trust most of my friends and family to owe me money, I don't actually want them to.  It's awkward and takes up my time and mostly in real life I would just give them the money rather than have them owe it to me.  I don't want the probability of my having to deal with the whole money thing to go up radically just because I'm socially well-connected.  And when I do choose to ignore a loan to a friend, I want it to be because they actually got the money rather than because someone else did.

So, like in hawala, people will really only use this system through a few major players (the "gateways").  Who will generally be for-profit businesses and thus need to pay for their time.  Meaning the entire Ripple thing might end up just being the equivalent of internal accounting in Paypal or Western Union--cheap and as trustworthy as the business, but provided to outsiders at a price tag.

One area I could see this being valuable is b2b (business to business) where you have businesses who are normally trading transactions all the time anyways and now need to "settle up" a lot less often, lowering their costs.  Like I could see all the Bitcoin exchanges becoming hubs and then allowing for much easier movement of liquidity between them (both fiat and btc).  But I'm not sure there would be a substantial reduction of costs to their customers, as transaction costs are presumably not a large portion of their overall budgets.  It also seems like Ripple provides the infrastructure for any entity to easily issue a virtual currency without worrying about the implementation, which could be interesting.

Anyways that's what I've got so far.  I'll be watching with interest.

I granted you trust for some pocket change. I have few connections, so I'm trying to branch out :)

[email protected]

#63 Jez San

Jez San

    Member

  • Lifetime
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 12:30 AM

please may i also have some ripples to play with?   rBiagLVDyaMyqyzaBV6K1zPX9M8n3kZEXE

#64 bo shen

bo shen

    Member

  • Former Member
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • LocationAtlanta, Georgia; Shanghai, China.

Posted 09 May 2013 - 12:38 AM

View PostJez San, on 09 May 2013 - 12:30 AM, said:

please may i also have some ripples to play with?   rBiagLVDyaMyqyzaBV6K1zPX9M8n3kZEXE

Sent.

#65 Lorenzo Petrone

Lorenzo Petrone

    Bitgoblin

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 229 posts
  • LocationGenova, Italy

Posted 14 May 2013 - 10:30 AM

My faith in Ripple has just dropped when this issue got closed without any answer...

I'll withdraw my assets from there and, other than keep running the XGG gateway, I'll back away from it.

#66 bo shen

bo shen

    Member

  • Former Member
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • LocationAtlanta, Georgia; Shanghai, China.

Posted 15 May 2013 - 04:05 AM

View PostLorenzo Petrone, on 14 May 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

My faith in Ripple has just dropped when this issue got closed without any answer...

I'll withdraw my assets from there and, other than keep running the XGG gateway, I'll back away from it.

Understand your feeling and your decision! I might do the same natural action. :)
Opencoin's people are too busy to answer your concern these days, I think, and two main executives left comments for you.
They put their names on the company, I truly believe they will do it.  
TRUST CREATES VALUE. They do need people's trusts on all aspects, will do right things.

#67 Kyle Jerviss

Kyle Jerviss

    kjj

  • Lifetime
  • Pip
  • 28 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 04:57 AM

In various places, they have claimed that it will be incredibly difficult to change the system once released, and that is the reason they haven't released it yet.  I'm inclined to give Joel the benefit of the doubt that that is the reason, and that their concern is legitimate.  But that doesn't seem like a positive trait to have.

Once released, many eyeballs will uncover many flaws, and it will really suck for them if they can't fix them easily.  Sadly, there is no way to get that level of code and design review without releasing it.

It doesn't help that OpenCoin's business model has a (probably) fatal flaw.  Once the code is released, a dozen clones will pop up out of spite, and opencoin will not hold XRPs in any of them.  One of them may even have a somewhat fair-ish system that allocates XRPs for participation.

#68 Lorenzo Petrone

Lorenzo Petrone

    Bitgoblin

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 229 posts
  • LocationGenova, Italy

Posted 15 May 2013 - 09:10 AM

View PostKyle Jerviss, on 15 May 2013 - 04:57 AM, said:

In various places, they have claimed that it will be incredibly difficult to change the system once released, and that is the reason they haven't released it yet.  I'm inclined to give Joel the benefit of the doubt that that is the reason, and that their concern is legitimate.  But that doesn't seem like a positive trait to have.

Once released, many eyeballs will uncover many flaws, and it will really suck for them if they can't fix them easily.  Sadly, there is no way to get that level of code and design review without releasing it.

It doesn't help that OpenCoin's business model has a (probably) fatal flaw.  Once the code is released, a dozen clones will pop up out of spite, and opencoin will not hold XRPs in any of them.  One of them may even have a somewhat fair-ish system that allocates XRPs for participation.
I doubt clones will ever be a problem, just look at the bitcoin clones who were rightly ignored: unless you have something to add, people will know you are worthless.

But the rest of the post is really quite right and I agree.

#69 David Schwartz (JoelKatz)

David Schwartz (JoelKatz)

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • LocationMurphys, CA

Posted 27 May 2013 - 12:21 AM

Bitcoin was presented to the community as a done deal, take it or leave it. If there had been huge problems with, say, the block reward schedule, there would probably have been no way to fix it. We're very lucky that there were no such fundamental problems with Bitcoin. I don't know if that was really luck or genius on the part of the designers, but none of the Ripple developers have that kind of confidence.

True security flaws or actual brokenness should be fixable in Ripple, just as it was in Bitcoin. But design changes and new features may or may not be. It's hard to know. For example, here was an extended discussion that led to an agreement to make significant behavior changes in Ripple. The change was controversial, and there's no way to know whether it would have happened if it required a community consensus: https://github.com/r...ient/issues/748

I would consider it a personal failure if the source code wasn't opened by the end of the year. But we're still processing community input on major design aspects of the system.

For example, another issue we're working on now is the way transactions are chained. Each transaction has a sequence number that is compared to an account sequence number to prevent a transaction from being applied twice. This created an interesting problem for systems that create large numbers of transactions automatically. Say they create transactions 6 through 10 but say transaction 7 fails for some fundamental reason that prevents it from applying at all. When they create a new transaction 7, their old transactions 8 through 10 become legal and anyone who had a copy of them could apply them. This issue would likely not have been discovered without the system getting real use. And because of the control we still have, we can make sure it gets fixed.

We are pretty good about making the source available to people who want to study it or develop services that use it. Getting rid of the drag on adoption that the server source being closed has created is a very high priority for us.

#70 Joel Dalais

Joel Dalais

    IBWT

  • Lifetime
  • Pip
  • 645 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 27 May 2013 - 12:33 AM

Quote

none of the server code is currently open

That and the fact they've given out a sizable quantity to their staff and company on the outset.

And the other stuff that Greg (Maxwell) said.

It just rings alarm bells for me also..

Hope it gets all worked out though.

#71 Pavel Chorbadzhiyski

Pavel Chorbadzhiyski

    Member

  • Lifetime
  • Pip
  • 154 posts
  • LocationSofia - Bulgaria, Munich - Germany

Posted 27 May 2013 - 08:06 AM

View PostDavid Schwartz (JoelKatz), on 27 May 2013 - 12:21 AM, said:

For example, another issue we're working on now is the way transactions are chained. Each transaction has a sequence number that is compared to an account sequence number to prevent a transaction from being applied twice. This created an interesting problem for systems that create large numbers of transactions automatically. Say they create transactions 6 through 10 but say transaction 7 fails for some fundamental reason that prevents it from applying at all. When they create a new transaction 7, their old transactions 8 through 10 become legal and anyone who had a copy of them could apply them. This issue would likely not have been discovered without the system getting real use. And because of the control we still have, we can make sure it gets fixed.
This is the corner stone of every payment system!

XRPs must be generated by their issuer (Open Coin) as transaction numbers (unique serial number for every XRP). They must have all the characteristics of a bond - issue date, serial number, expiry date, date of redemption etc.

#72 Lorenzo Petrone

Lorenzo Petrone

    Bitgoblin

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 229 posts
  • LocationGenova, Italy

Posted 29 May 2013 - 08:57 AM

View PostDavid Schwartz (JoelKatz), on 27 May 2013 - 12:21 AM, said:

And because of the control we still have, we can make sure it gets fixed.
This I don't understand.
Why are you afraid servers won't apply patches?

#73 Maciej J. Bańkowski

Maciej J. Bańkowski

    Member

  • Lifetime
  • Pip
  • 33 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 29 May 2013 - 10:18 AM

View PostDavid Schwartz (JoelKatz), on 27 May 2013 - 12:21 AM, said:

True security flaws or actual brokenness should be fixable in Ripple, just as it was in Bitcoin. But design changes and new features may or may not be. It's hard to know.

View PostLorenzo Petrone, on 29 May 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

This I don't understand.
Why are you afraid servers won't apply patches?

Same here.
If you are not ready to make the project open sourced and allow others to contribute at least make it public, so that people can audit the code.

Even if someone would try to exploit any early bugs it is not like Ripple is very popular yet, no real harm would be done. It is still a very niche solution.
Kindly please, publish the code.

#74 Enrique Delgado

Enrique Delgado

    Member

  • Lifetime
  • Pip
  • 44 posts
  • LocationMiami, Florida

Posted 08 June 2013 - 05:12 PM

I've got 1,000 XRP burning a hole in my pocket...

I thought I would try kicking the tires again... If anyone needs a little Ripple let me know.

#75 Lim Boon Chuan

Lim Boon Chuan

    Member

  • Lifetime
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • LocationSingapore

Posted 09 June 2013 - 01:10 AM

Ripple can help in the faster adoption of Bitcoin, but I doubt this is their aim.  The first target at Bitcointalk shows that they are looking for converts to exchange Bitcoins for XRPs.   But it is still closed beta.   I have tried it with a lot of problems.   So at least for now, Bitcoin still stands far ahead of XRP.

#76 David Schwartz (JoelKatz)

David Schwartz (JoelKatz)

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • LocationMurphys, CA

Posted 15 June 2013 - 10:05 AM

View PostLorenzo Petrone, on 29 May 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

Why are you afraid servers won't apply patches?
No, that's not it at all.

The tradeoff with Bitcoin's decision to go open source so early is that community input to shape the design was minimal. Where was my chance to argue against the block reward schedule before Satoshi set it in stone? Where was your chance to argue against the use of base 58 for the accounts? Where was the chance to argue for a different format for the transaction language? Where was the chance for public participation in the choice of ECDSA curves? Bitcoin was presented to the public as a done deal.

Ironically, by keeping the source closed, we keep public participation in the design open. Ripple benefited quite a bit from this decision. We made some fundamental design changes that might have been impossible to do once the system was open to different stakeholders. Essentially, Ripple is still where Bitcoin was before the source was opened -- except Ripple was open to the public for use, analysis, and comment while design changes could still easily be made while Bitcoin was not.

View PostMaciej J. Bańkowski, on 29 May 2013 - 10:18 AM, said:

If you are not ready to make the project open sourced and allow others to contribute at least make it public, so that people can audit the code.
I don't think we can do one without the other. We've made the source code open to several different outside groups for auditing purposes. But as soon as the source code is widely available, people will almost certainly start running validators on the network. At that point, any changes to the transaction processing have to be agreed upon. Once you decentralize a system, or it decentralizes itself, there's no going back. We don't want it to be easy for one party to control it once anyone can run the source.

#77 Lorenzo Petrone

Lorenzo Petrone

    Bitgoblin

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 229 posts
  • LocationGenova, Italy

Posted 15 June 2013 - 01:36 PM

View PostDavid Schwartz (JoelKatz), on 15 June 2013 - 10:05 AM, said:

No, that's not it at all.

The tradeoff with Bitcoin's decision to go open source so early is that community input to shape the design was minimal. Where was my chance to argue against the block reward schedule before Satoshi set it in stone? Where was your chance to argue against the use of base 58 for the accounts? Where was the chance to argue for a different format for the transaction language? Where was the chance for public participation in the choice of ECDSA curves? Bitcoin was presented to the public as a done deal.

Ironically, by keeping the source closed, we keep public participation in the design open. Ripple benefited quite a bit from this decision. We made some fundamental design changes that might have been impossible to do once the system was open to different stakeholders. Essentially, Ripple is still where Bitcoin was before the source was opened -- except Ripple was open to the public for use, analysis, and comment while design changes could still easily be made while Bitcoin was not.
This is the first time I read a reasonable explanation for that... did I somehow miss it, or is it the first time you present it this way?

#78 Brian Goss

Brian Goss

    Member

  • Lifetime
  • Pip
  • 1,268 posts
  • LocationRochester, MN

Posted 16 June 2013 - 03:40 AM

View PostLorenzo Petrone, on 15 June 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:


This is the first time I read a reasonable explanation for that... did I somehow miss it, or is it the first time you present it this way?

I don't think it is. I always read what he has to say whenever I see it. I'm pretty sure I've heard that analysis (well reasoned) before.

#79 Joshua Zeidner

Joshua Zeidner

    Member

  • Former Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 06:55 PM

View PostJeff Coleman, on 12 April 2013 - 06:08 AM, said:

One area I could see this being valuable is b2b (business to business) where you have businesses who are normally trading transactions all the time anyways and now need to "settle up" a lot less often, lowering their costs.  Like I could see all the Bitcoin exchanges becoming hubs and then allowing for much easier movement of liquidity between them (both fiat and btc).  But I'm not sure there would be a substantial reduction of costs to their customers, as transaction costs are presumably not a large portion of their overall budgets.  It also seems like Ripple provides the infrastructure for any entity to easily issue a virtual currency without worrying about the implementation, which could be interesting.

Hi Jeff, there already exist systems designed specifically for this purpose:  http://www.getsgloba...m/why-gets.html , http://www.bartersys.com/index.asp

They are referred to as 'Barter Systems' or 'Barter Currencies'.  I'm not sure if Ripple is really well suited for this purpose.

#80 Joshua Zeidner

Joshua Zeidner

    Member

  • Former Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 06:59 PM

View PostLorenzo Petrone, on 15 June 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

This is the first time I read a reasonable explanation for that... did I somehow miss it, or is it the first time you present it this way?

Hi Lorenzo, I'm very skeptical of this explanation for why Ripple isn't yet open source.  David Schwartz seems to be the only one who is relaying this explanation and I've never heard any officer of OpenCoin, and thus anyone who might be held accountable for such a statement, present this claim to the public.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: ripple