3 ms·

If you're interested in a Bitcoin like currency without mining check out Ripple.

by hnolable 13y ago

BetaCygni 13y ago
If you're interested in a scam, check out Ripple...
- simias 13y ago
  I've never heard of ripple before the GP's post, any particular reason why you consider it a scam? After all, many people consider bitcoin to be a scam as well...
  - tych0 13y ago
    The coin is issued by a central entity who has kept 50% of it. This makes people suspicious. Bitcoin has no central issuing entity, thus no one person to 'get rich quick' in some scam type operation.
    - Nursie 13y ago
      Instead it has a few early adopters with massive stakes, and a roughly 90% hoarding rate from the last analysis I saw.
      - BetaCygni 13y ago
        Yeah, the early adopters got rich. I think that's fair because they invested in something that was really uncertain at that point. You could even argue that if you buy bitcoins now you're still an early adopter. Bitcoin itself is less of a pyramid scheme than gold. This is because even when the price stops to rise (or even when it collapses) you can use it to easily transfer value across the world.
        Nursie 13y ago
        I don't think there was really much risk there, and the generation seems to me to have been far too stacked at the front end. Just IMHO of course. I won't, ever, be buying bitcoins for this and other reasons.
  - haakon 13y ago
    http://ripplescam.org/ http://ripplescam.org/ has a bunch of arguments for this.
vbuterin 13y ago
Or PPCoin for that matter: http://bitcoinmagazine.com/6528/what-proof-of-stake-is-and-why-it-matters/ http://bitcoinmagazine.com/6528/what-proof-of-stake-is-and-w...
- yebyen 13y ago
  Shame downvoters. Proof-of-stake is bitcoin minus the constantly exponential energy increasing requirement for profitable mining operations. Ripple has the same advantage, but without the benefit that (ongoing) minting of the coin is actually decentralized. In fact you can't see for sure that there is or isn't ongoing minting with Ripple.
  - TwoFactor 13y ago
    All Ripples were pre-minted and in control of the founders. They've only released a very limited supply of them.
    - vbuterin 13y ago
      That I agree with; it's really the main thing I have against Ripple.
  - nullc 13y ago
    Not a shame: At least so far as has been envisioned proof-of-stake doesn't appear to actually work. The fundamental problem with proof of stake is that there is nothing at stake: Its in your rational best interest to mine all possible subchains that you can mine in, and not only in the single unique chain you believe to be most likely to survive, as is the case for PoW. PPCoin's security is not provided by proof of stake but by cryptographically signed lockins broadcast to the network by its creator... so you have to trust this anonymous party to behave honestly. It sort of defeats the purpose of having a cryptocurrency. Ripple is even worse in that regard— an opaque ledger implemented via a closed source system.
    - vbuterin 13y ago

If you're interested in a Bitcoin like currency without mining check out Ripple.

BetaCygni 13y ago

If you're interested in a scam, check out Ripple...

simias 13y ago
I've never heard of ripple before the GP's post, any particular reason why you consider it a scam? After all, many people consider bitcoin to be a scam as well...
- tych0 13y ago
  The coin is issued by a central entity who has kept 50% of it. This makes people suspicious. Bitcoin has no central issuing entity, thus no one person to 'get rich quick' in some scam type operation.
  - Nursie 13y ago
    Instead it has a few early adopters with massive stakes, and a roughly 90% hoarding rate from the last analysis I saw.
    - BetaCygni 13y ago
      Yeah, the early adopters got rich. I think that's fair because they invested in something that was really uncertain at that point. You could even argue that if you buy bitcoins now you're still an early adopter. Bitcoin itself is less of a pyramid scheme than gold. This is because even when the price stops to rise (or even when it collapses) you can use it to easily transfer value across the world.
      - Nursie 13y ago
        I don't think there was really much risk there, and the generation seems to me to have been far too stacked at the front end. Just IMHO of course. I won't, ever, be buying bitcoins for this and other reasons.
- haakon 13y ago
  http://ripplescam.org/ http://ripplescam.org/ has a bunch of arguments for this.

vbuterin 13y ago

Or PPCoin for that matter: http://bitcoinmagazine.com/6528/what-proof-of-stake-is-and-why-it-matters/ http://bitcoinmagazine.com/6528/what-proof-of-stake-is-and-w...

yebyen 13y ago
Shame downvoters. Proof-of-stake is bitcoin minus the constantly exponential energy increasing requirement for profitable mining operations. Ripple has the same advantage, but without the benefit that (ongoing) minting of the coin is actually decentralized. In fact you can't see for sure that there is or isn't ongoing minting with Ripple.
- TwoFactor 13y ago
  All Ripples were pre-minted and in control of the founders. They've only released a very limited supply of them.
  - vbuterin 13y ago
    That I agree with; it's really the main thing I have against Ripple.
- nullc 13y ago
  Not a shame: At least so far as has been envisioned proof-of-stake doesn't appear to actually work. The fundamental problem with proof of stake is that there is nothing at stake: Its in your rational best interest to mine all possible subchains that you can mine in, and not only in the single unique chain you believe to be most likely to survive, as is the case for PoW. PPCoin's security is not provided by proof of stake but by cryptographically signed lockins broadcast to the network by its creator... so you have to trust this anonymous party to behave honestly. It sort of defeats the purpose of having a cryptocurrency. Ripple is even worse in that regard— an opaque ledger implemented via a closed source system.
  - vbuterin 13y ago