Embedded Systems Conference
Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 3 / 4   >   >>
anon2632018287
User Rank
Author
Re: Not the same thing
anon2632018287   8/12/2014 12:59:25 PM
NO RATINGS
Bitcoin is decentralized.  Ripple fully depends on OpenCoin, Inc.  If you are investing you are investing in two entirly different things and two entireley different concepts.  The key here is the coins can't be mined in some agreed upon fashion, they must be issued by OpenCoin, Inc.  Ripple is closer to investing in a stock rather than a decentrailized currency.  There is no decentralized concensus with Ripple because there is no way to achieve that concensus.

 

Bitcoin is an experiment in a decentralized consensus.  It is funny to see people say its flaw is that there is no overlord or central authority.  When you analyze these currency systems the thing to look for is a decentralized consensus mechanism such as mining.  If that does not exist then you have a centralized system.  If it is "backed" by something then you also have a centralized system because some entity controls the assets.  These types of things are not like Bitcoin, litecoin, etc.  Not that everything centralized is bad, it is just not the same thing.

Nick_S
User Rank
Author
Re: Not the same thing
Nick_S   8/12/2014 12:47:34 PM
NO RATINGS
@Anon, the Ripple protocol is designed to be decentralized, just like bitcoin. What you're referring to is the currency distribution. The reason the coins are premined is because Ripple works via consensus, rather than requiring mining. There is no mining, therefore coins can't be mined.

One of the main advantages to consensus is speed. Transactions can be confirmed in just a few seconds.

anon2632018287
User Rank
Author
Re: Not the same thing
anon2632018287   8/12/2014 10:40:24 AM
NO RATINGS
The truth is Bitcoin is decentralized and Ripple is not.  The risks associated with each are completly different.  You want to divert attanetion away from this fact with a bunch of buzzwords.  they are both experimental and risky for different reasons.

Ariella
User Rank
Author
Re: Not the same thing
Ariella   8/12/2014 9:45:35 AM
NO RATINGS
@anon I gather you're one of the bitcoiners who view Ripple with suspicion. I've seen a lot of posts to that effect as I used to write for CoinDesk.  In truth ripples are only going to be worth what people are willing to pay for them. There is no intrinsic value to any of these currencies. Bitcoin started out with a value of just pennies and took about a year just to reach the dollar mark. Then it climbed, fell, climbed, fell, etc. Just as for stocks, or some may even say tulips, the values are all about perception. The volatility is actually bad for bitcoin's adoption as a currency for mass adoption. That's one of the issues I addressed in the CFO piece based on interviews with bitcoin enthusiasts who found that people just weren't ready to take their pay in digital currency because it was too much like gambling.

 

anon2632018287
User Rank
Author
Re: Not the same thing
anon2632018287   8/11/2014 10:12:46 PM
NO RATINGS
"Math-based" currency is just some general term that menas you use math.  Decentralized means no enity is in control and that there is a consensus achieved in a decentralized manner.  Ripple is a centralized system issues by OpenCoin, Inc.  People use buzzwords like "math-based" currencies to confuse people over the difference between a centralized currency like Ripple, Amazon Coin, Fluz, etc. and decentralized currencies like Bitcoin, Litecoin, etc.  Decentralized currencies depend on "mining" to achieve the consensus while centrilized systems depend on some singular entity.  If you don't understand the difference then DON'T INVEST.

"Backed" usually means you have some something left over if the value of the currency goes to zero.  Currencies like Bitcoin, Ripple, and US Dollar are not backed if that is the dedinition you use.  Some people say US Dollar is backed by the US Government, Bitcoin is backed by the faith of their users.  If that is the definition you use then Ripple is backed by OpenCoin, Inc. since they issue Ripple and the value of Riupple depends on OpenCoin, Inc. operatinging their trading platform.

Ariella
User Rank
Author
Re: Not the same thing
Ariella   8/11/2014 9:41:45 PM
NO RATINGS
@anon I'm not quite sure what you're getting at in declaring both to be decentralized. Both ripple and bitcoin are considered to be math-based currencies  -- not "backed" -- and the same holds true for a number of currencies that attempted to copy bitcoin.  Open Coin was the original name of the company that launched Ripple, though the name was changed to Ripple Labs at the end of September 2013 just over 3 weeks after after I published an article on digital currency on CFO.com

anon2632018287
User Rank
Author
Re: Not the same thing
anon2632018287   8/11/2014 7:31:44 PM
NO RATINGS
Bitcoin is decentralized, Ripple is decentralized and issued by OpenCoin, Inc.  OpenCoin, inc. is funded by the sales/appreciation of Ripple.  Some people have tried to cloud the waters and have tried to compare centralized systems or "backed" currencies with decentralized systems like Bitcoin.  Apples and oranges.

Ariella
User Rank
Author
Re: Not the same thing
Ariella   8/11/2014 7:12:12 PM
NO RATINGS
@anon Ripple positions itself as a complement to, rather than a competitor with, Bitcoin. In fact, the site has a page dedicated to Ripple for bitcoiners. Only fractions of ripples are destroyed as a safety measure. As per http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2014/03/21/what-is-payment-protocol-ripple-and-how-does-it-allow-for-physically-backed-digital-gold-trading/ "There is also a certain amount of XRP that is destroyed with every transaction on the system. The amount is a negligible .00001 XRP (a extraordinarily tiny fraction of a penny), and is used to prevent spam transactions from clogging the protocol. As such, each wallet on Ripple needs to have a minuscule XRP reserve balance of 20, which" at the time of that writing was jut a bit over a quarter. 

anon2632018287
User Rank
Author
Not the same thing
anon2632018287   8/11/2014 6:46:00 PM
NO RATINGS
Bitcoin and Ripple are completely different things.  Bitcoin is a decentralized currency, payment system and commodity.  Ripple is a centralized system created by a company and they issue the currency.  If Ripple were to charge a transaction fee they would be regulated as a money transmitter.  Instead, they created Ripples which must be "destroyed" in order to facilitate a transaction on their platform.

Bitcoin has 8 decimal places so there is no issue with microtransactions as far as dividing a Bitcoin up into smaller denominations.

 

Ariella
User Rank
Author
Re: Micro-transactions
Ariella   8/11/2014 6:36:26 PM
NO RATINGS
Max, yes, in fact they would require far less decimel division. As bitcoin is about $500 per coin, give or take, purchases usually have to made in fractions of the coin represented by decimels. But ripples, at least for now, have a much smaller valuation. 

Micro-transactions are one of the big advantages for digital currency because the current payment noncash options typically add on fees that are a disincetive for any transactions below a certain amount. Even physical retail establishments sometimes ask for a $10 minimum for credit card payments. 

<<   <   Page 3 / 4   >   >>


Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Chris Wiltz, Managing Editor, Design News

10 Greatest Hoaxes in the History of Engineering
Chris Wiltz, Managing Editor, Design News
2 comments
You'll probably be reading your fair share of fake headlines on April 1, but phony tech news - both for scams and humor - aren't anything new. The history of science and technology is rife ...

Max Maxfield

My Mom the Radio Star
Max Maxfield
Post a comment
I've said it before and I'll say it again -- it's a funny old world when you come to think about it. Last Friday lunchtime, for example, I received an email from Tim Levell, the editor for ...

Bernard Cole

A Book For All Reasons
Bernard Cole
3 comments
Robert Oshana's recent book "Software Engineering for Embedded Systems (Newnes/Elsevier)," written and edited with Mark Kraeling, is a 'book for all reasons.' At almost 1,200 pages, it ...

latest comment mjlinden Thanks for your input!
Martin Rowe

Leonard Nimoy, We'll Miss you
Martin Rowe
5 comments
Like many of you, I was saddened to hear the news of Leonard Nimoy's death. His Star Trek character Mr. Spock was an inspiration to many of us who entered technical fields.

Special Video Section
After a four-year absence, Infineon returns to Mobile World ...
A laptop’s 65-watt adapter can be made 6 times smaller and ...
An industry network should have device and data security at ...
The LTC2975 is a four-channel PMBus Power System Manager ...
In this video, a new high speed CMOS output comparator ...
The LT8640 is a 42V, 5A synchronous step-down regulator ...
The LTC2000 high-speed DAC has low noise and excellent ...
How do you protect the load and ensure output continues to ...
General-purpose DACs have applications in instrumentation, ...
Linear Technology demonstrates its latest measurement ...
10:29
Demos from Maxim Integrated at Electronica 2014 show ...
Bosch CEO Stefan Finkbeiner shows off latest combo and ...
STMicroelectronics demoed this simple gesture control ...
Keysight shows you what signals lurk in real-time at 510MHz ...
TE Connectivity's clear-plastic, full-size model car shows ...
Why culture makes Linear Tech a winner.
Recently formed Architects of Modern Power consortium ...
Specially modified Corvette C7 Stingray responds to ex Indy ...
Avago’s ACPL-K30T is the first solid-state driver qualified ...
NXP launches its line of multi-gate, multifunction, ...
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
EE Times Senior Technical Editor Martin Rowe will interview EMC engineer Kenneth Wyatt.
Flash Poll