5 ms·

I don't understand why this hasn't happen sooner as it's been 8 years since their release. Ripple is a centralized, managed network. It's nothing like Bitcoin

I don't understand why this hasn't happen sooner as it's been 8 years since their release. Ripple is a centralized, managed network. It's nothing like Bitcoin, Ethereum, or many other decentralized projects. Ripple is not a cryptocurrency. For years I've told loved ones, friends, and anyone with a passing interest in the nascent space to avoid Ripple like the plague.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
efwfwef 6y ago
It's a currency based on cryptography, let's not try to exclude projects based on random definitions. You want to be more specific, like, it is not censorship-resistant.
- fastball 6y ago
  Ok, but the cryptography is pointless if it's a centralized system.
  - petersellers 6y ago
    How so?
    - martinko 6y ago
      Because you might as well just use an SQL database
      - pat2man 6y ago
        “Proof of authority” chains are a lot more than just a database. There is still a verifiable audit trail etc.
        px43 6y ago
        Eh, last I checked the five primary validator nodes are all run by Ripple.com. Not really "POA" when there's only one authority IMO.
        saberdancer 6y ago
        Nothing stops you from having a verifiable audit trail in a SQL database. You could even decentralize the audit trail. Problem with Ripple is creation of new XRPs, they had full control over that.
        thinkloop 6y ago
        How do you decentralize the audit trail? Would need something like ripple
        strken 6y ago
        Generate a cumulative checksum of everything that happened yesterday plus the previous day's checksum, and post it in the local paper, on your website, and in all investor documentation.
        waynesonfire 6y ago
        so a sql database
        harkal 6y ago
        So files with indexes... so storage devices with a file systems... so... so bits of information...
        jnwatson 6y ago
        So, a database plus digital signatures.
      - ForHackernews 6y ago
        FWIW, this is how I feel about every crypto-so-called- "currency".
        martinko 6y ago
        Don't want to get into an argument about crypto currencies, but the value proposition of BTC is different. What is not replaceable by a simple DB is it decentralization and resilience to attack, its resistance to seizure and its incorruptibility in terms of maximum supply (the digital gold / store of value narrative).
        ForHackernews 6y ago
        It's worth highlighting that there are distributed databases that meet all those criteria except "incorruptibility in terms of maximum supply". You're right to point out that there are a few very specific use cases that a distributed blockchain with multiple independently-owned verification nodes will satisfy and other more performant databases will not. Whether that makes them "valuable" like gold is left as an exercise for the reader.
        ric2b 6y ago
        Distributed is not the same as decentralized. A decentralized system is a distributed system that still works _when nodes are owned by multiple different (even competing/malicious) parties_.
        fastball 6y ago
        Exactly. In other words, a "trustless" system. See the Byzantine Generals Problem[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_fault https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_fault
        ForHackernews 6y ago
        yes, yes, I said that already: "...multiple independently-owned verification nodes..."
  - icf80 6y ago
    you hold the key to decide what to do with the funds
    - fastball 6y ago
      Which Ripple can invalidate if they control the network, which they do.
nomad543 6y ago
You are missing the point, the SEC is not after Ripple because of centralization. They are going to sue Ripple because of the ICO. So in this case, Ethereum will probably also be categorized as securities because it sold pre-mined coins on their launch.
SOLAR_FIELDS 6y ago
It actually was useful for a brief period as a pretty fast and reliable way to process a transaction. There was a time when a good portion of the major cryptocurrencies had transaction confirmation times on the order of minutes and XRP was one of the few reliable and cheap ways to get a fast transaction (seconds) completed.
- zapdrive 6y ago
  Of course, because it's a CENTRALIZED service. I can make a centralized transaction settlement service with a completion time in milliseconds. But it will not have the security and freedom of a decentralized service.
  - Espressosaurus 6y ago
    The security of having an audit trail with no way of reversing the transaction and the freedom to get ripped off by a shady exchange?
    - bitxbitxbitcoin 6y ago
      The freedom to get ripped off by a shady exchange is the same as the freedom to not have your money stolen by the government. Worth it, in my opinion.
      - loceng 6y ago
        Except you can, through effort and organization (none of this "trustless" mantra non-sense/propaganda), get in place a competent democratically elected government with integrity via accountability and oversight - perhaps even running for elected positions yourself if you're passionate and strong enough. Or you can ignore the nuances and complexes, say fuck it, and support a system that disables power that good organizations do need to manage bad actors - instead of turning the clock back and making the world a "free for all" - making tools like the Magnisky Act unenforceable, along with other unavoidable pitfalls that pro-Bitcoiners ignore, scoff at without rebuttal, or glance over without serious thought. Regulatory capture is real and it needs to be addressed always - and if you work from founding principles and are honest with yourself you'll come to the conclusion that centralized organizations are a necessity to fighting "evil"/bad behaviour with good, responsible, trustworthy people The argument then goes into nuance of where the debate continues as to how conservative or liberal you are - how "small" or "big" the government is, e.g. what decision making power or function does or should government have, e.g. Universal Basic Income/UBI - the Freedom Dividend as Andrew Yang calls it - would arguably be more of traditional Conservative/Republican leaning - giving $1,000/month to individuals for THEM TO DECIDE what to do with the money vs. some bureaucratic government agency spending that money themselves making broad-vague decisions, almost always influenced by regulatory capture and industrial complexes manipulating the system via influencing politicians and the population via propaganda of various forms: "tobacco is good for you" - says your doctor, "fat is bad for you" says the sugar and health industry, "MDMA/mushrooms are bad for you" - says big pharma industry who can't patent those medicines, etc. Edit: LUL - imagine a person actually had to put the effort into writing a qualitative response instead of getting a dopamine hit from a single click to ignore/avoid engaging.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

efwfwef 6y ago

It's a currency based on cryptography, let's not try to exclude projects based on random definitions. You want to be more specific, like, it is not censorship-resistant.

fastball 6y ago
Ok, but the cryptography is pointless if it's a centralized system.
- petersellers 6y ago
  How so?
  - martinko 6y ago
    Because you might as well just use an SQL database
    - pat2man 6y ago
      “Proof of authority” chains are a lot more than just a database. There is still a verifiable audit trail etc.
      - px43 6y ago
        Eh, last I checked the five primary validator nodes are all run by Ripple.com. Not really "POA" when there's only one authority IMO.
      - saberdancer 6y ago
        Nothing stops you from having a verifiable audit trail in a SQL database. You could even decentralize the audit trail. Problem with Ripple is creation of new XRPs, they had full control over that.
        thinkloop 6y ago
        How do you decentralize the audit trail? Would need something like ripple
        strken 6y ago
        Generate a cumulative checksum of everything that happened yesterday plus the previous day's checksum, and post it in the local paper, on your website, and in all investor documentation.
      - waynesonfire 6y ago
        so a sql database
        harkal 6y ago
        So files with indexes... so storage devices with a file systems... so... so bits of information...
      - jnwatson 6y ago
        So, a database plus digital signatures.
    - ForHackernews 6y ago
      FWIW, this is how I feel about every crypto-so-called- "currency".
      - martinko 6y ago
        Don't want to get into an argument about crypto currencies, but the value proposition of BTC is different. What is not replaceable by a simple DB is it decentralization and resilience to attack, its resistance to seizure and its incorruptibility in terms of maximum supply (the digital gold / store of value narrative).
        ForHackernews 6y ago
        It's worth highlighting that there are distributed databases that meet all those criteria except "incorruptibility in terms of maximum supply". You're right to point out that there are a few very specific use cases that a distributed blockchain with multiple independently-owned verification nodes will satisfy and other more performant databases will not. Whether that makes them "valuable" like gold is left as an exercise for the reader.
        ric2b 6y ago
        Distributed is not the same as decentralized. A decentralized system is a distributed system that still works _when nodes are owned by multiple different (even competing/malicious) parties_.
        fastball 6y ago
        Exactly. In other words, a "trustless" system. See the Byzantine Generals Problem[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_fault https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_fault
        ForHackernews 6y ago
        yes, yes, I said that already: "...multiple independently-owned verification nodes..."
- icf80 6y ago
  you hold the key to decide what to do with the funds
  - fastball 6y ago
    Which Ripple can invalidate if they control the network, which they do.

nomad543 6y ago

You are missing the point, the SEC is not after Ripple because of centralization. They are going to sue Ripple because of the ICO. So in this case, Ethereum will probably also be categorized as securities because it sold pre-mined coins on their launch.

SOLAR_FIELDS 6y ago

It actually was useful for a brief period as a pretty fast and reliable way to process a transaction. There was a time when a good portion of the major cryptocurrencies had transaction confirmation times on the order of minutes and XRP was one of the few reliable and cheap ways to get a fast transaction (seconds) completed.

zapdrive 6y ago
Of course, because it's a CENTRALIZED service. I can make a centralized transaction settlement service with a completion time in milliseconds. But it will not have the security and freedom of a decentralized service.
- Espressosaurus 6y ago
  The security of having an audit trail with no way of reversing the transaction and the freedom to get ripped off by a shady exchange?
  - bitxbitxbitcoin 6y ago
    The freedom to get ripped off by a shady exchange is the same as the freedom to not have your money stolen by the government. Worth it, in my opinion.
    - loceng 6y ago
      Except you can, through effort and organization (none of this "trustless" mantra non-sense/propaganda), get in place a competent democratically elected government with integrity via accountability and oversight - perhaps even running for elected positions yourself if you're passionate and strong enough. Or you can ignore the nuances and complexes, say fuck it, and support a system that disables power that good organizations do need to manage bad actors - instead of turning the clock back and making the world a "free for all" - making tools like the Magnisky Act unenforceable, along with other unavoidable pitfalls that pro-Bitcoiners ignore, scoff at without rebuttal, or glance over without serious thought. Regulatory capture is real and it needs to be addressed always - and if you work from founding principles and are honest with yourself you'll come to the conclusion that centralized organizations are a necessity to fighting "evil"/bad behaviour with good, responsible, trustworthy people The argument then goes into nuance of where the debate continues as to how conservative or liberal you are - how "small" or "big" the government is, e.g. what decision making power or function does or should government have, e.g. Universal Basic Income/UBI - the Freedom Dividend as Andrew Yang calls it - would arguably be more of traditional Conservative/Republican leaning - giving $1,000/month to individuals for THEM TO DECIDE what to do with the money vs. some bureaucratic government agency spending that money themselves making broad-vague decisions, almost always influenced by regulatory capture and industrial complexes manipulating the system via influencing politicians and the population via propaganda of various forms: "tobacco is good for you" - says your doctor, "fat is bad for you" says the sugar and health industry, "MDMA/mushrooms are bad for you" - says big pharma industry who can't patent those medicines, etc. Edit: LUL - imagine a person actually had to put the effort into writing a qualitative response instead of getting a dopamine hit from a single click to ignore/avoid engaging.