And, wtf there was something else but I can't even remember. Oh, the thing about being a validator. Like, you don't get paid to be a validator, so why would anyone be one? Well, (1) because they want the network to be healthy (what is "collective action problem") and (2) yes they control the network but they couldn't 51% attack it because, well, that would be majorly uncool man, and validators are not going to do something uncool, because that could harm the network (just like no one would ever steal money because that would devalue money because people wouldn't trust it any more, oh and also (3) if you are so uncool to ask all these questions then we don't want you as a validator anyway!
Then these fucking rippletards are threatening anybody who questions this. WTF is this -- seems like some scientology level shit. Srsly. wtf with this shit.
>yes they control the network but they couldn't 51% attack it because, well, that would be majorly uncool man This is the literal rationalisation of every single coin that isn't BTC or ETH. Without exception.
James Allen
Not sure man but I felt really smart explaining nostro vostro to my parents back in 2017. They were impressed. I drink a lot though and don't really remember what it is.
>I think you know exactly what it is I don't get it
>Then these fucking rippletards are threatening anybody who questions this. WTF is this (((i think you know wtf is going on)))
William Edwards
>This is the literal rationalisation of every single coin that isn't BTC or ETH. Without exception.
Hate to say it but you may have something there. I remember watching presentation by DASH, and that was basically her answer -- in front of a room full of people.
Carson Taylor
I bet the threats are false flags from other shit coin speculators. You guys constantly crying about XRP makes me more confident. If you're taking flak you're over the target.
William Wilson
>>I think you know exactly what it is >I don't get it notsrifsrs.jpg
1) Journo writes article that BTFO ripple's bullshit story about how banks are leaving money on the table and ripple is going to help them 2) Psycho rippletard posts tweet saying name of her home town and saying "looks like nice place to visit" -- which is something a psycho fucktard would say 3) she asks if that is a threat 4) some other fucktard says "I think you know exactly what it is" which, to a rational person comes across as a threat.
Jace Brooks
>I bet the threats are false flags from other shit coin speculators. yeah, that's a great point, genius. Just like happens all the time I'm hearing about fans of tron and eos and stellar threatening people, oh wait that's right NO ONE HAS EVER HEARD THAT because they don't.
Jose Ramirez
you don't have to 51% attack your private chain you can fork it in to whatever the fuck you want the whole point of crypto being open source is the fact that we can see that a coin isn't inflating the currency at a 500000% into some hidden address why would anyone ever use a private blockchain?
Carson James
>thinking a 51% attack on the xrp network is possible lel do your research man
You think there is a boogeyman out to get xrp when in actual fact it's just retarded, batshit insane holders like you threatening rational people publicly.
Lincoln Martin
>Oh, the thing about being a validator. Like, you don't get paid to be a validator, so why would anyone be one? Why does anyone run a bitcoin full node? Do you care about anything other than rent seeking, or is that the purpose of crypto in your view?
>yes they control the network but they couldn't 51% attack it because, well, that would be majorly uncool man There is no such thing as a 51% attack because reorgs don't occur. Each node builds each ledger independently and waits for sufficient agreement among the validators it is listening to before proceeding. Ripple could only succeed in forking themselves off the network if they tried to manipulate it.
It is not a private chain and Ripple can't force anyone to implement any code change or follow a particular fork.
Some brilliant examples of biz thinking here. It's really not that difficult to understand, but I think I might have better luck teaching my dog to tie his shoes.
David Collins
>>Oh, the thing about being a validator. Like, you don't get paid to be a validator, so why would anyone be one? >Why does anyone run a bitcoin full node? Do you care about anything other than rent seeking, or is that the purpose of crypto in your view? >>yes they control the network but they couldn't 51% attack it because, well, that would be majorly uncool man >There is no such thing as a 51% attack because reorgs don't occur. Each node builds each ledger independently and waits for sufficient agreement among the validators it is listening to before proceeding. Ripple could only succeed in forking themselves off the network if they tried to manipulate it.
So where is the part where you say "ha ha, I was only pretending to be retarded."
Idiot, the whole fucking point of these decentralized networks is that they INCENTIVIZE prosocial behavior. Imagine saying to Satoshi "you don't need to provide rewards to miners -- what's the matter with you, is rent seeking all you care about?
"Each node builds a ledger independently and waits for sufficient agreement among the validators" This is moronic. How is this a consensus protocol. Oh wait, yeah we just WAIT for consensus. How long do you wait? Oh, whatever, however long it takes. People can just fork if they don't like it....
This is so moronic. Yes actually this IS a brilliant example of biz thinking: biz does not just blindly accept stupid hype from scam artists. That's why biz uncovered bitconnect before many others, and why biz saw what a shit show Iota was.
Go shill somewhere else, fucktard. And tell your psycho fuckhead friends to stop threatening people on twitter.
Sebastian Walker
>Idiot, the whole fucking point of these decentralized networks is that they INCENTIVIZE prosocial behavior.
I thought it was about financial freedom? Taking power away from banks? Smart contracts? Internet of Value? Micropayments? Anonymity? Take your pick.
Incentives are simply a way to (poorly) secure the network. Cryptos that rely on this are fundamentally flawed. They start out with the assumption that 51% of the mining power (or coins/votes in PoS) can always be trusted. As soon as that assumption fails, the network is broken. This is why you have to incentivize certain behavior.
If you use a distributed agreement protocol like consensus in XRP, you can remove the need to trust the 51%. The only thing you trust a validator to do is put transactions in order. Every other rule (and validity of every transaction) can be enforced by each participant applying deterministic rules. There are no reorgs and no double spends when you approach it this way. And there is no need to incentivize anyone to behave themselves because they can't cheat the system to steal funds.
>This is so moronic. Way over your head apparently.
>Go shill somewhere else, fucktard. And tell your psycho fuckhead friends to stop threatening people on twitter. I'll stay, you take your 55 IQ somewhere else. You're probably the idiot making threats so you can screenshot and post it on biz.
Connor Perez
>I thought it was about financial freedom? Taking power away from banks? Smart contracts? Internet of Value? Micropayments? Anonymity? Take your pick. >Incentives are simply a way to (poorly) secure the network. Cryptos that rely on this are fundamentally flawed. They start out with the assumption that 51% of the mining power (or coins/votes in PoS) can always be trusted. As soon as that assumption fails, the network is broken. This is why you have to incentivize certain behavior.
This is painfully, painfully stupid. The philosophical objective of Satoshi (as far as anyone knows) was to provide an alternative to banks. But the MECHANISM for achieving this was a decentralized network that incentivizes the nodes that validate transactions. When I said the “whole fucking point” any person who has any fucking clue how DLT works would understand that I was referring to the point as in the idea underlying the ARCHITECTURE not the ultimate goal for the system in society.
Saying that incentives are a poor way to secure a network is the single stupidest thing anyone has ever said on biz. I’m sorry, you think David Shithead and his merry band of rippletards have created a network — and a network to handlePAYMENTS no less — that transcends INCENTIVES.
“The only thing you trust a validation to do is put transactions in order.” Oh God the fucking stupid. What if the validators don’t agree with each other.
And yes, you got me, I’m the guy who is false flagging by setting up a twitter account in the UK several years ago so I could meticulously plan ahead to post it on biz.
I really really really wish I could go back to not even knowing about thsi utterly fucked coin and its moron psycho followers. Have been watching a bunch of the link marines on twitter UTTERLY blow you fucking idiots out of the water. Now that I look at the kind of moronic scam horseshitt that you are peddling, I realize it’s worse than I thought. Seriously fuck off.
Caleb Peterson
>When I said the “whole fucking point” any person who has any fucking clue how DLT works would understand that I was referring to the point as in the idea underlying the ARCHITECTURE
I responded to your original argument which was that no one would run a validator because they aren't incentivized, as if there was no other reason to do so. That's clearly false.
>Saying that incentives are a poor way to secure a network is the single stupidest thing anyone has ever said on biz. Incentives can only nudge someone in the right direction. They can't guarantee any particular behavior. Something much stronger than that will be required for any crypto that really wants mainstream adoption.
>Oh God the fucking stupid. What if the validators don’t agree with each other. Each node chooses a list of validators it wants to listen to (called a unique node list or UNL). Within that UNL, 80% agreement on transaction ordering is required to make forward progress. If greater than 20% go offline or refuse to agree with anyone, each honest validator can simply remove them from their UNL and pick up right where they left off.
>Seriously fuck off. Nah, I don't mind explaining the basics to you.
Luis Green
>First there was the whole thing where they kept saying that they don't own XRP. But wait, you do, don't you, and why does every article talk about how they invented XRP
Imagine being this fucking retarded. Where does one even begin?
Blake Barnes
Those page 10 shitcoins are a threat to nobody, unlike XRP.
Jacob Foster
It’s time for xrp to have another pump. Remember the 4x just weeks back?
Tyler Stewart
Ripple is basically a SMS service right ?
Joseph Adams
no its time for a massive dump. its way overvalued.
xrp haters all over, yet you guys obviously don't do your research properly lmao. you are just bitter fags and mad because satoshi's vision is being capitalized now and turning to the opposite of what cryptocurrency was supposed to be.
take your anarchist coins and shove them up your ass, us xrp hodlers on the other hand will take some nice profits from this. get in, or stay behind. keep praying for LINK to be actually used one day LOL
Pretty much sums up xrp fans. If you dont believe there is a vast conspiracy to make xrp the one world currency and how btc is evil for opposing banks then you get threats against you and other passive aggressive attacks.
Mason Turner
>xrp >haters >reddit spacing >hodler imagine this calling someone else faggot. i just want to make money but the xrp crowd is going to get a big yikes from me. always so defensive
Jordan Johnson
>When all members of a large net are nudged in the same direction, you can't cheat the system. And there is no more effiecien way. Of course you can. Ask Ethereum Classic or Bitcoin Gold. Given that mining itself is not profitable right now, it would actually be more profitable to 51% an exchange.
Jonathan Bell
There is little risk of 51% attack it's a completely trusted network owned by Ripple moron. ANYONE CAN RUN A NODE to validate BUT ALL NODES NOT AUTHORIZED BY RIPPLE AS A TRUSTED NODE ARE IGNORED.
> It's important to understand that these validation messages are used only by rippled servers that explicitly trust your validator by listing it on their Unique Node Lists (UNLs). Servers that do not include your validator in their UNLs ignore your validator's messages in the consensus process. A validator that is not included in any UNL is called an untrusted validator.
There is no such thing as an authorized node. Every node in the network has absolute authority to choose their own UNL. This means they could ignore all of Ripple's validators at the drop of a hat if they wanted. And validators are not doing anything particularly important anyway. You just need them to put transactions in canonical order. Virtually zero trust required. The only thing being ignored if Ripple does not add your validator to their recommend UNL is your proposed ordering of transactions. Validators don't dictate to any other node whether a transaction is valid or not.
Hudson Young
If the node you are running is not included in Ripple's UNL then it is ignored. You and your friends and the rest of the world can come up with any UNL you want to but you are not going to be included validating transactions in the Ripple network and cannot vote on protocol changes, fees, etc.
> We also plan to add two third-party validators to the XRP Ledger’s Unique Node Lists (UNLs) in the coming months. UNLs are an important subset of trusted nodes that can validate transactions, vote on protocol changes via amendments and modify fees on ledger.
It's a fucking closed, trusted network where a small group runs the entire network and owns almost the entire supply scamming people with the narrative that banks are going to buy your bags because it's going to free up trillions of dollars they hold in nostro/vostro accounts.
>If the node you are running is not included in Ripple's UNL then it is ignored. Ignored by nodes who do not have your validator in their UNL. Not all nodes use Ripple's recommendation.
>You and your friends and the rest of the world can come up with any UNL you want to but you are not going to be included validating transactions in the Ripple network and cannot vote on protocol changes, fees, etc. Every single node verifies every single transaction. Whether they are a validator or not. Whether they are on Ripple's recommended UNL or not. Your node WILL NOT accept transactions that are invalid or double spend funds regardless of the UNL configuration or how the validators on your UNL behave.
VALIDATORS DO NOT TELL OTHER NODES WHICH TRANSACTIONS ARE VALID. They broadcast their opinion on transaction ordering. Then they broadcast "validations", or signed hashes of the ledger they have built. This allows the nodes listening to them to check it against their own ledger and ensure they do not fork.
Your opinion on protocol changes and fees is worth just as much as it is in any other crypto. People can choose to listen to your opinion or not. If you disagree with the rules the rest of the network chooses to use, you are free to fork and continue to transact with anyone else who prefers your change. Unlike PoW, you can do this safely without having to incentivize millions of dollars per day in mining to secure the network.
>It's a fucking closed, trusted network where a small group runs the entire network It is a completely open, decentralized network where anyone can run a node or validator. Every node can choose to listen to or ignore any validator it wants at any time it wants. There are no special privileges, and no one gains more influence in the network based on the number of asics/coins they own, or number of people they can bribe to vote for them. There is no other cryptocurrency in existence with these properties.
Cameron Adams
>It is a completely open, decentralized network where anyone can run a node or validator.
I swear Ripple fags are complete morons who don't understand something as basic as decentralization and it's like talking to a fucking wall. It doesn't matter if there are 10,000 nodes validating transactions if those nodes are not in Ripple's UNL. They are not trusted and they don't count. It doesn't matter if 10,000 nodes are in consensus that a transaction is valid if 10 UNLs determine that the transaction is invalid. That transaction does not count. The 10,000 validators don't count. It's a trusted setup where a centralized authority, Ripple has to approve you as a 3rd party validator and add your node to their UNL.
Compare that to a decentralized network where it requires no permission from any central authority. In POW and POS networks, anyone can join staking their resources. There is no trust because there is incentive that well behaved nodes will be rewarded with tokens for supporting the network while malicious nodes will be penalized wasting expensive energy/resources.
xrp is like the pets.com of crypto, they think just adding blockchain matters when the system is centralized, and that companies are going to voluntarily use their own funding token as means of transferring money, instead of using a shared platform like swift, where everybody in the group benefits, instead of one company.
Colton Carter
Ripple retards are worse than the Vechain cult. I never thought the crypto space would become retarded enough to argue that Ripple is decentralized.
