Clif, if you read some code that purported to be the open source code of an application, how would you know that this code IS the code used -- if ever it was, how would you know it had not been revised? I believe that "open source code" ONLY means you may copy the code and compile and run it yourself if you wish. I do NOT believe that if I am told the code for some application is "open source code" that this at all is any assurance of integrity or security.
While one cannot prove there are back doors in code unless doing extensive analysis and testing, one cannot prove the contrary either without a similar effort.
After reviewing NUMEROUS articles in which the author of a major antiviral software used back doors to collect evidence, and then released volumes of said evidence, I think it is reasonable to suspect any and all software as having back doors so long as there is a profit motive for using them.
Consequently, I take issue with any claim that the process and systems associated with cryptocurrencies are secure, and I think if you said, "I want to audit your systems and software that you CLAIM are open source" you would get nothing in reply but LAUGHTER.
In short, any claim that cryptocurrencies are trustworthy is BS.
Pardon me, but I started coding in 1974, in COBOL, FORTRAN, and PL-I. I had a military career, during part of which my MOS was Computer Systems Officer; after that I was a Systems Analyst for 15 years. You should ask before you assume.
I haven't assumed. Your title's may be impressive, however, i believe you are reading into this comment. Think of "code" at a macro level. Trust is difficult, blockchain is trustworthy as a public ledger. I trust this more than most people i know.
I want to react to your "public ledger" comment. Suppose there were a public ledger that listed how much money you had. If it were a LOT, would you not be afraid of being visited at 3 a.m. by intruders who demanded your password at gunpoint for a quick transfer? With computers they could implement a myriad of subsequent transfers and the purchase of goods before law enforcement could react, assuming you are alive to tell the story.
OTOH, if your holdings really are not all that public, what happens if you log in one day and everything is zeroed out? What is your recourse? I have heard that this has happened to NUMEROUS "Bitcoin millionaires". Wherever there is a login key there is the ability to keylog at the server end, done by a hacker or done by the official security officer.
Just telling you I am skeptical and think there is probably a lot of misplaced trust.
Simplistic thinking - You don’t understand software, software binaries or operational systems. It is very difficult to isolate a network from malicious actors.
Here's how you can tell that the code you are using is the same as the source code you are reading: Download the open-source repository, set your local repository to the version that you want to build, and then build it yourself. The building process is normally highly automated, and the build files used to automate this process are normally included in the open-source repository.
Even better: The artifacts (applications) they build and publish on the internet for you to download are typically provided with checksums. The main purpose of these is to ensure that the version that you actually end up downloading is the one that the publishers intend for you to download. Once you build the artifact locally, you can get a checksum on it yourself. If you get the same checksum as the published version, then the artifact is exactly the same, and you now have assurance that the version of the software that other people are using is built from the code you have read. The producers of the software usually have a highly automated process for publishing these artifacts, and if you end up with something with a different checksum, just go to their forum and tell them you weren't able to generate an artifact with the same checksum. I'll bet someone on the forum would be happy to help you in your efforts to get an exact match on the published artifact.
Very well described, John. How many people do you think take the time to do this? Ten? Five? Zero? And any check of course is only valid for one moment in time.
The point is while one COULD (given the time and resources) make checks, it is impractical, so what remains is trust, which basically in this era has been discovered to be fantastically over-rated, as there has been lying and deception from all corners of the world.
The beauty of it is that it only takes one person to discover and publicize the fraud for the project to be toast. It only takes one tech-savvy person to get suspicious and start digging.
A single check is sufficient for a single version for eternity, so long as the publishers don't change the checksum they publicize, and changing the checksum would put the publishers at extreme risk of their fraud being exposed. Once you go through these steps for one version, it becomes trivial to repeat the process for any other version.
How often this happens in real life of course depends on the popularity of the project. I expect it happens more than one might think. If you consider a large open source project, there are going to be many contributors who aren't direct members of the publishing team. All these people learn to perform these build steps on their own. For a project as popular as bitcoin, I would be surprised to learn that these kinds of checks were not occurring for every single release.
Just one person discovers the fraud, once, and the cryptocurrency immediately goes to 0.
The dumbest assertion is that there is a back door to Bitcoin. If someone had first-hand knowledge then they could simply post the code block on a Bitcoin forum and the developers would remove it right away. Supposedly two "inflation" bugs have been discovered and fixed.
Contrast that to any "gold backed" currency which is one giant back door for the criminals who issue it. The oldest con in world history. If you personally don't have access to the bullion vault, all you have are pieces of paper or blips on a screen. In 6000 years, the story never changes. Until Bitcoin came along.
The back doors are contained in the SSL encryption block chain itself. I am sure they are more than top secret for the spooks only. Bitcoin itself has never been hacked but the block chain contains all information and subject to those with the necessary code. Millions of Bitcoins have been stolen and millions more will. Warren Buffett, Paul Tudor Jones, Catherine Austin Fitts all have reservation about digitals - but what the hell do any of these people know about finance.
I have always agreed with you about XRP as it seems the bankster's tend to favor it, not those who understand the decentralization that cryptos can and should offer.
You seem confused. The whole point about the XRP Ledger is it is decentralised. It replaces a lot of banking functions. If anything the bankers should be afraid of it, as it eats their lunch.
I listened to what Clif said. XRP is not mined, therefore it is more than likely centrally controlled. Clif has read the code. Have you? If XRP is decentralized, why would bankers want it? It appears that Russia is moving closer to using Bitcoin for international exchange. Exactly what Clif's data has predicted.
I'm guessing you don't read code but have stocked up on XRP. Who is confused here?
Yes, I’ve read the code. I’ve been developing on the XRP Ledger for 5 years now.
The fact XRP is not mined has nothing to do with decentralization. The XRP Ledger is not proof of stake. The original genesis wallet was open for anyone to freely take XRP from.
Do bankers want XRP?
You can make whatever guesses and assumptions you want or you can Google my name and do your own research.
If you can convince Clif, then perhaps I'll reconsider. If the BRICS choose to use XRP, I'll reconsider. Since you develop on XRP, you have an obvious bias.
Cliff would have to actually read the source code to convince himself. But clearly he hasn’t done that.
You are still trying to confuse RippleNet and the XRP Ledger. RippleNet has a central authority. The XRP Ledger doesn’t.
Also, I see you cropped that quote in order to deliberately misrepresent it. If you were honest you would include the rest.
“ Ripple is a banker’s choice in the blockchain because it allows them to reduce cost of crossborder payments while having a central authority (RIPPLE LABS) to act as a liaison to crypto world. ”
It is not saying the XRP Ledger has a central authority, but that banks are using a centralised company as a liaison to a decentralised blockchain.
If Clif and the BRICS say anything positive about XRP, I'll be willing to change my mind. Russia is looking to use Bitcoin for cross border payments. Bitcoin's use for cross border payments was reported in Clif's ALTA reports.
The BRICS represent the larger number of humans than Europe, Japan and the US. And the BRICS are growing. This trend represents a decline in the West's hegemony.
Clif like Bix… does not read code. Of Clif says he is C/C++ developer but I don’t believe this. I suspect that Clif worked on contract somewhere around the MS organization in the ‘90s.
Why do I say this?
Because Clif is wrong in his assertions about Ripple/XRP.
Clif has certainly NOT read ANY Ripple developed products- RippleD, InterLedger, etc. I don’t expect that anyone person knows or is familiar with the code other than Schwartz or Nick Bourgalis. Most real developers will understand that all software products have library dependencies which are outside the scope of the Ripple code.
Clif is WRONG about RippleNet being used for solely cross border.
So… why is Clif like Bix wound up about Ripple??
All software projects, if significant will be co-opted. The question is, is it safe enough.
You the reader can define ‘safe’.
—
Nothing is real… safe for the common man should be to survive the current event and bring value to your local community. If Google or another large entity is invested in or on the board of directors then it should be safe for the common man.
Remember, Bix’s track record in crypto - Veratassuum (dead), LiteCoin (dead), Theta (soon to be dead). These people (Clif and Bix) are only pseudo software technical.
HashGraph has Google investment as does Ripple. Stellar has IBM and Accenture investment. These companies have better information than you (reader) will have.
—
Recall that SSL encryption (open source) was compromised.
XRP AND XLM WILL ASSIST SWIFT VIA ACCENTURE CLIF. This is documented in Swift documents recently released by Swift on their website. They call out Ripple by name, also Ripple is called out in the recent Digital Dollar Foundation announcement.
Does this mean everyone will accept them, surrendering to another centralized currency like we have today? Making the same mistake we already made accepting the Federal Reserve? Have we learned nothing?
In which case I suggest a change of career. What Cllif states (e.g. The XRP Ledger's only usecase is central bank messaging) shows he hasn't even bothered to read the code he claims he has.
Well given XRP was developed to be a "better Bitcoin", why would it be such a stretch of the imagination to think they might be developed by the same people? Not saying they were, but I don't see why you think they couldn't be.
XRP is a decentralized public blockchain that has an institutional use case. Solves a multi trillion dollar cross border payment problem. Yes big banks are evil but might as well make money with them is my view. BTC isnt the one
Nothing. It doesn’t have one. It is not a blockchain. It is a payments messaging network. It can’t transfer value itself. That is why the XRP Ledger is needed. The XRP Ledger is used to move value.
I have somewhat, now, on the RippleNet and XRPL.org websites.
What we know is that Ripple has RE-BRANDED the software. Jed McCaleb certainly did NOT develop anything on the XRP Ledger, although, Ripple now claims he did. Further, we know that 50 Billion XRP in escrow are XRP Token on the original network.
So, if Ripple goes public then it would appear to take RippleNet software with them leaving XRP Ledger as an open source project with no funding and optional mandate.
It would appear that the real value of Ripple, the company, would have been founded by what is known as XRP Ledger.
—
Why would anyone BUY XRP, if the real value is the RippleNet business model?
You seem confused. RippleNet and the XRP Ledger do different things. They are both valuable in different ways. Ripple uses them both for different reasons. And uses them both together for ODL.
McCaleb was the original creator of the XRP Ledger, although most development itself was done by Schwartz and Britto. You can literally look at the source code commits to verify this. The full history is there.
People buy XRP as they believe it will go up in value as it is one of the few cryptocurrencies with real world adoption beyond just speculation.
Ripple have their business model, other XRP Ledger developers and users have their business models.
Jed did not create Bitcoin. RippleNet is designed as an improvement to Mt. Gox system. The Consensus component is Brito’s contribution and independent of Jed’s design.
You don’t need to agree to disagree… you can understand at a glance Clif’s understanding of code. When he reverts to a garden hose metaphor you know he is lost.
Internet people have strengths and weaknesses… software is not Clif’s domain of expertise.
No. Completely different networks. Completely different codebases. Written by different teams in different programming languages. XRP is native token to the XRP Ledger. RippleNet doesn’t have a token, it is not a blockchain.
Ripple software interacts with both networks. They use RippleNet for payments between financial institutions and XRP Ledger to source liquidity (a product called ODL).
The XRP Ledger was developer in 2011 before Ripple existed. Ripple created RippleNet around 2015. RippleNet is usable by financial institutions. It is a permissioned, regulatory compliant network.
Clif, this is the first thing I've listened of you. But I'm seriously wondering if you were looking at the right codebase? The XRP Ledger is an open source, decentralised, permissionless, blockchain.
1) You say that the only use of XRP is as a central bank messaging system. Clearly it is not, as XRP is in widespread use at the moment, and central bank messaging system is certainly not one of those usecases. You know why? Of course you do, because you already answered why in the next point
2) I agree that XRP is not going to "replace" SWIFT. Why? Because the main purpose of SWIFT is as an intrabank messaging system, and the XRP Ledger (as you say) is not a messaging system. It is a payments settlement network. It allows peer to peer payments. RippleNet could possibly replace SWIFT, but not the XRP Ledger.
3) You claim that XRP "only works with the banks". Again, you have read the source code, so you know you are lying when you say this. XRP is permissionless and anyone can (and does) use it. The XRP Ledger has nothing intrinsically to do with banks whatsoever. Again, you know this as you have read the source code.
There are a lot of savvy people on this channel, so I have a question that no one has answered so far, not my banker, not any other podcaster. It may seem simplistic and obvious to y'all, but so far no one can tell me if social security will collapse along with everything else. My major income is SS, as my pt job doesn't pay enough to live on. If SS dies, so will a lot of elders who are too old to work, or too infirm, etc. So this question is becoming crucial. Having said that, I can understand it might get paid by some crypto currency or debit card system from the CB , but as long as I can cash it out, I'm ok. As long as cash exists. Or I can transfer it to a different system. So, has any one got an understanding of what is the likely scenario?
My take is that the CB's plan is to use both SS and UBI, universal basic income, to force people into the CBDC system. They want us to be starving, cold, broke, and unemployed with no escape path. They will then offer payments in CBDC only to those people who accept biometric ID (the Mark) and abide by the corresponding social credit score. CB's do not want a cash alternative. They, via captured governments, want to be able to track, tax, and approve of every tiny transaction. Complete control.
Will there be another option offered by white hats? Are there white hats?
Our survival rests on how many people refuse and how long they refuse. By noncompliance we resisted the first attempt at the vax pass on smart phones. That was their proof of concept. The next test will be for all the marbles.
I'm hoping there will be an intermediate method to payments, providing SS survives. Getting out of the CB/FED is essential, so I"m hoping white hats will find a solution. Pure blood and staying that way. Biometric ID hasn't figured in postings lately; it may have fallen by the wayside. Midterms will determine the future, although not immediately.
We are moving to a era private money systems where you will need to decide when and how to pay for services or products with selective types of tokens.
The key will be to understanding which benefits you.
You need to remain as ‘private’ as you can with each wallet type and each operating system platform and each hardware wallet.
I'm not at the age yet,... I don't expect SS to be there for me... but, you've also reminded me of the parallel to this...
"if '[digital] food stamps and [digital] welfare' will collapse with everything else"
The covid fear propaganda and covid lockdowns and covid remdesivir killed a lot old people. So, it wouldn't surprise me if they let SS collapse.
On the other hand, with '[digital] food stamps and [digital] welfare'... I would say, select "outages" in "select regions" -- from time-to-time -- for when "riots and looting in the streets" need to be sparked
"I admitted I was powerless over a technical understanding of cryptocurrency." I am a moron in this regard, but I know enough to be thrilled that Clif is hopeful. I'm a very small potatoes HODLer, so all the more I need that BTC shizz to shoot back up. Here's what I need help understanding if anyone dare aid me, and if so thank you in advance: 🚨How does the central bank literally, in practical terms, cause the price of BTC to plummet? Are they DIRECTLY manipulating the price? If so, how, what's to stop anyone else/another entity from also doing so?🚨 (Probably everything I don't know about coding and technology, but if you wanna hear about adverbs, then I'm your man--so to speak.)
I need to stop worrying and to have hope, especially while I'm enduring the punishment inflicted on me by my blue industry. It's not just teachers doing what Project Veritas exposed; namely blackballing older and/or conservative teachers. It's also young indoctrinates who are taking over key positions in the book industry. They are icing out the elders, who are light-years ahead of them in industry skill and would never interfere with free expression. I digress. For me, an older broad by myself, it's important to be financially solvent, but I'm now back in debt. If someone would be so kind as to explain why/how Clif is right (and intuitively I KNOW he is!) about the near-future rebounding of crypto, it would help me shut down my internal monologue of personal doom. 🙏
Hi Clif High, regarding renewable energy, you never seem to mention storage of electricity via battery or hydro. Plus what about Wave and tidal energy, do you see any future development in this kind of technology?
Also what about virtual power plants, where roof top solar is distributed throughout local communities?
I really enjoy listening to you and have done since 2017.
Clif, if you read some code that purported to be the open source code of an application, how would you know that this code IS the code used -- if ever it was, how would you know it had not been revised? I believe that "open source code" ONLY means you may copy the code and compile and run it yourself if you wish. I do NOT believe that if I am told the code for some application is "open source code" that this at all is any assurance of integrity or security.
While one cannot prove there are back doors in code unless doing extensive analysis and testing, one cannot prove the contrary either without a similar effort.
After reviewing NUMEROUS articles in which the author of a major antiviral software used back doors to collect evidence, and then released volumes of said evidence, I think it is reasonable to suspect any and all software as having back doors so long as there is a profit motive for using them.
Consequently, I take issue with any claim that the process and systems associated with cryptocurrencies are secure, and I think if you said, "I want to audit your systems and software that you CLAIM are open source" you would get nothing in reply but LAUGHTER.
In short, any claim that cryptocurrencies are trustworthy is BS.
Wrong! @TIger. If you don't read code, it's stupid to comment... it says it all in Clif's title. No ill will intended. Be woo!
Pardon me, but I started coding in 1974, in COBOL, FORTRAN, and PL-I. I had a military career, during part of which my MOS was Computer Systems Officer; after that I was a Systems Analyst for 15 years. You should ask before you assume.
I haven't assumed. Your title's may be impressive, however, i believe you are reading into this comment. Think of "code" at a macro level. Trust is difficult, blockchain is trustworthy as a public ledger. I trust this more than most people i know.
I want to react to your "public ledger" comment. Suppose there were a public ledger that listed how much money you had. If it were a LOT, would you not be afraid of being visited at 3 a.m. by intruders who demanded your password at gunpoint for a quick transfer? With computers they could implement a myriad of subsequent transfers and the purchase of goods before law enforcement could react, assuming you are alive to tell the story.
OTOH, if your holdings really are not all that public, what happens if you log in one day and everything is zeroed out? What is your recourse? I have heard that this has happened to NUMEROUS "Bitcoin millionaires". Wherever there is a login key there is the ability to keylog at the server end, done by a hacker or done by the official security officer.
Just telling you I am skeptical and think there is probably a lot of misplaced trust.
Babble…
Just stay with the software discussion.
Simplistic thinking - You don’t understand software, software binaries or operational systems. It is very difficult to isolate a network from malicious actors.
You look at the hash of the compiled binaries to know if the sources produce the same output.
Here's how you can tell that the code you are using is the same as the source code you are reading: Download the open-source repository, set your local repository to the version that you want to build, and then build it yourself. The building process is normally highly automated, and the build files used to automate this process are normally included in the open-source repository.
Even better: The artifacts (applications) they build and publish on the internet for you to download are typically provided with checksums. The main purpose of these is to ensure that the version that you actually end up downloading is the one that the publishers intend for you to download. Once you build the artifact locally, you can get a checksum on it yourself. If you get the same checksum as the published version, then the artifact is exactly the same, and you now have assurance that the version of the software that other people are using is built from the code you have read. The producers of the software usually have a highly automated process for publishing these artifacts, and if you end up with something with a different checksum, just go to their forum and tell them you weren't able to generate an artifact with the same checksum. I'll bet someone on the forum would be happy to help you in your efforts to get an exact match on the published artifact.
Very well described, John. How many people do you think take the time to do this? Ten? Five? Zero? And any check of course is only valid for one moment in time.
The point is while one COULD (given the time and resources) make checks, it is impractical, so what remains is trust, which basically in this era has been discovered to be fantastically over-rated, as there has been lying and deception from all corners of the world.
The beauty of it is that it only takes one person to discover and publicize the fraud for the project to be toast. It only takes one tech-savvy person to get suspicious and start digging.
A single check is sufficient for a single version for eternity, so long as the publishers don't change the checksum they publicize, and changing the checksum would put the publishers at extreme risk of their fraud being exposed. Once you go through these steps for one version, it becomes trivial to repeat the process for any other version.
How often this happens in real life of course depends on the popularity of the project. I expect it happens more than one might think. If you consider a large open source project, there are going to be many contributors who aren't direct members of the publishing team. All these people learn to perform these build steps on their own. For a project as popular as bitcoin, I would be surprised to learn that these kinds of checks were not occurring for every single release.
Just one person discovers the fraud, once, and the cryptocurrency immediately goes to 0.
The dumbest assertion is that there is a back door to Bitcoin. If someone had first-hand knowledge then they could simply post the code block on a Bitcoin forum and the developers would remove it right away. Supposedly two "inflation" bugs have been discovered and fixed.
Contrast that to any "gold backed" currency which is one giant back door for the criminals who issue it. The oldest con in world history. If you personally don't have access to the bullion vault, all you have are pieces of paper or blips on a screen. In 6000 years, the story never changes. Until Bitcoin came along.
The back doors are contained in the SSL encryption block chain itself. I am sure they are more than top secret for the spooks only. Bitcoin itself has never been hacked but the block chain contains all information and subject to those with the necessary code. Millions of Bitcoins have been stolen and millions more will. Warren Buffett, Paul Tudor Jones, Catherine Austin Fitts all have reservation about digitals - but what the hell do any of these people know about finance.
Nonsense…
Blockchains don’t use SSL.
I have always agreed with you about XRP as it seems the bankster's tend to favor it, not those who understand the decentralization that cryptos can and should offer.
You seem confused. The whole point about the XRP Ledger is it is decentralised. It replaces a lot of banking functions. If anything the bankers should be afraid of it, as it eats their lunch.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JoelKatz/status/1367204578035265540
Exactly.
I listened to what Clif said. XRP is not mined, therefore it is more than likely centrally controlled. Clif has read the code. Have you? If XRP is decentralized, why would bankers want it? It appears that Russia is moving closer to using Bitcoin for international exchange. Exactly what Clif's data has predicted.
I'm guessing you don't read code but have stocked up on XRP. Who is confused here?
https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/russia-one-step-closer-using-bitcoin-crypto-international-trade
Yes, I’ve read the code. I’ve been developing on the XRP Ledger for 5 years now.
The fact XRP is not mined has nothing to do with decentralization. The XRP Ledger is not proof of stake. The original genesis wallet was open for anyone to freely take XRP from.
Do bankers want XRP?
You can make whatever guesses and assumptions you want or you can Google my name and do your own research.
You are confused.
If you can convince Clif, then perhaps I'll reconsider. If the BRICS choose to use XRP, I'll reconsider. Since you develop on XRP, you have an obvious bias.
Ripple is a banker's choice in the blockchain because it allows them to reduce cost of crossborder payments while having a "central authority" (RIPPLE LABS). https://cryptotradersguide.org/2017/12/15/ripple-the-bankers-choice/
It's the "central authority" feature that should cause freedom loving people to reject it.
I think your bias is the source of your confusion.
Cliff would have to actually read the source code to convince himself. But clearly he hasn’t done that.
You are still trying to confuse RippleNet and the XRP Ledger. RippleNet has a central authority. The XRP Ledger doesn’t.
Also, I see you cropped that quote in order to deliberately misrepresent it. If you were honest you would include the rest.
“ Ripple is a banker’s choice in the blockchain because it allows them to reduce cost of crossborder payments while having a central authority (RIPPLE LABS) to act as a liaison to crypto world. ”
It is not saying the XRP Ledger has a central authority, but that banks are using a centralised company as a liaison to a decentralised blockchain.
Thanks,
Did Clif not say that he has read the source code? I thought that is what he said at 4:40 in.
In any case, I added the link to the article. I was not trying to crop out anything.
In any case, I am suspicious of any crypto that the banks favor. Any thinking human being should be suspicious too.
Ripple is a technology company that operates in the financial sector and "created XRP." https://seekingalpha.com/article/4515217-what-is-xrp-and-ripple?source=acquisition_campaign_google&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=14049528666&utm_term=127999857095^dsa-1427141793820^^547854587978^^^g&internal_promotion=true
If Clif and the BRICS say anything positive about XRP, I'll be willing to change my mind. Russia is looking to use Bitcoin for cross border payments. Bitcoin's use for cross border payments was reported in Clif's ALTA reports.
The BRICS represent the larger number of humans than Europe, Japan and the US. And the BRICS are growing. This trend represents a decline in the West's hegemony.
Clif like Bix… does not read code. Of Clif says he is C/C++ developer but I don’t believe this. I suspect that Clif worked on contract somewhere around the MS organization in the ‘90s.
Why do I say this?
Because Clif is wrong in his assertions about Ripple/XRP.
Clif has certainly NOT read ANY Ripple developed products- RippleD, InterLedger, etc. I don’t expect that anyone person knows or is familiar with the code other than Schwartz or Nick Bourgalis. Most real developers will understand that all software products have library dependencies which are outside the scope of the Ripple code.
Clif is WRONG about RippleNet being used for solely cross border.
So… why is Clif like Bix wound up about Ripple??
All software projects, if significant will be co-opted. The question is, is it safe enough.
You the reader can define ‘safe’.
—
Nothing is real… safe for the common man should be to survive the current event and bring value to your local community. If Google or another large entity is invested in or on the board of directors then it should be safe for the common man.
Remember, Bix’s track record in crypto - Veratassuum (dead), LiteCoin (dead), Theta (soon to be dead). These people (Clif and Bix) are only pseudo software technical.
HashGraph has Google investment as does Ripple. Stellar has IBM and Accenture investment. These companies have better information than you (reader) will have.
—
Recall that SSL encryption (open source) was compromised.
Nothing is real.
You are correct Bix’s big crypto picks have been AWFUL 😂
Bix is probably the most ridiculous person on the internet. I'm flabbergasted that some extremely gullible folk actually pay him for financial advice.
XRP AND XLM WILL ASSIST SWIFT VIA ACCENTURE CLIF. This is documented in Swift documents recently released by Swift on their website. They call out Ripple by name, also Ripple is called out in the recent Digital Dollar Foundation announcement.
Does this mean everyone will accept them, surrendering to another centralized currency like we have today? Making the same mistake we already made accepting the Federal Reserve? Have we learned nothing?
https://mobile.twitter.com/JoelKatz/status/1367204578035265540
Thanks Clif!
Thanks Cliff....great education and help! Yes with all the information, I can make better decisions. t
Thank you Sir!
So super slow, huge fee antique ass bitcoin is better than XRP that takes 2 seconds to transfer and a penny? Lol got it
Yep, because it can't be effed with by the wefers
I suspect Bitcoin was the test pilot for XRP. I bet they were both created by David Schwartz.
Not sure why you think that... As Clif says...they are completely different.
You should probably do a little research instead of depend on Clif to make your opinions for you
Hahaha, I've been in this space for nearly a decade. I don't need Clif to tell me anything. But you and I are here and he confirms what I've known.
In which case I suggest a change of career. What Cllif states (e.g. The XRP Ledger's only usecase is central bank messaging) shows he hasn't even bothered to read the code he claims he has.
Guess we can agree to disagree, all I know is one is down 20% this week and one is up 60%, i’ll let you guess which is which 😉
Well given XRP was developed to be a "better Bitcoin", why would it be such a stretch of the imagination to think they might be developed by the same people? Not saying they were, but I don't see why you think they couldn't be.
Not entirely true, it can be 51% attacked...
Good luck with that.
Wefers don't mine.
I love XRP- SOLO and CORE. I love silver too. So boo hoo to you.
How can you love institutional centralised control?
XRP has nothing to do with institutional centralised control. The XRP Ledger is permissionless and decentralised.
XRP is a decentralized public blockchain that has an institutional use case. Solves a multi trillion dollar cross border payment problem. Yes big banks are evil but might as well make money with them is my view. BTC isnt the one
RippleNet is NOT decentralized.
RippleNet nodes are run by a consortium of banker family friends.
You are confusing RippleNet and the XRP Ledger. They are two entirely different things.
RippleNet is a centralised, permissioned, regulatory compliant network run by Ripple
The XRP Ledger is a decentralised, permissionless, blockchain run by a community of people running nodes worldwide.
Maybe RippleNet is a Layer 2 set of custom applications software running on top of the XRP Ledger.
I have not been able to find a RippleNet document re XRP Ledger functionality.
No. As stated already RippleNet is a totally different network. It is not a blockchain. Not layer 2. https://ripple.com/lp/odl-guide/
Maybe more succinctly…
What is the native token of RippleNet?
Nothing. It doesn’t have one. It is not a blockchain. It is a payments messaging network. It can’t transfer value itself. That is why the XRP Ledger is needed. The XRP Ledger is used to move value.
Hmm..,
The XRP Ledger Foundation is in Estonia, which as we all know is in the heart of Silicon Valley.
There is something queer about this business model.
Something queer? That it is decentralized? Why do you have such an issue with that?
Follow-on…
I have somewhat, now, on the RippleNet and XRPL.org websites.
What we know is that Ripple has RE-BRANDED the software. Jed McCaleb certainly did NOT develop anything on the XRP Ledger, although, Ripple now claims he did. Further, we know that 50 Billion XRP in escrow are XRP Token on the original network.
So, if Ripple goes public then it would appear to take RippleNet software with them leaving XRP Ledger as an open source project with no funding and optional mandate.
It would appear that the real value of Ripple, the company, would have been founded by what is known as XRP Ledger.
—
Why would anyone BUY XRP, if the real value is the RippleNet business model?
You seem confused. RippleNet and the XRP Ledger do different things. They are both valuable in different ways. Ripple uses them both for different reasons. And uses them both together for ODL.
McCaleb was the original creator of the XRP Ledger, although most development itself was done by Schwartz and Britto. You can literally look at the source code commits to verify this. The full history is there.
People buy XRP as they believe it will go up in value as it is one of the few cryptocurrencies with real world adoption beyond just speculation.
Ripple have their business model, other XRP Ledger developers and users have their business models.
Interesting distinction…
Do both RippleNet and XRP Ledger run the same software?
Is the XRP token native to both RippleNet and XRP Ledger?
If so, then is the XRP token on both networks interchangeable or fungible?
How do private instances of Ripple software interact with either RippleNet and XRP Ledger?
When did Ripple introduce these separate networks?
Who would use RippleNet?
Does Coil use RippleNet or XRP Ledger?
Can the current implementation of Zumm wallet work with both RippleNet and XRP Ledger.
Very interesting…
I believe Bitcoin and XRP were created by the same people.
Jed did not create Bitcoin. RippleNet is designed as an improvement to Mt. Gox system. The Consensus component is Brito’s contribution and independent of Jed’s design.
I guess we'll just have to see how things shake out and agree to disagree.
You don’t need to agree to disagree… you can understand at a glance Clif’s understanding of code. When he reverts to a garden hose metaphor you know he is lost.
Internet people have strengths and weaknesses… software is not Clif’s domain of expertise.
Getting ready to take the crypto plunge. Thx for the insight & confidence boost‼️👍🏼
No. Completely different networks. Completely different codebases. Written by different teams in different programming languages. XRP is native token to the XRP Ledger. RippleNet doesn’t have a token, it is not a blockchain.
Ripple software interacts with both networks. They use RippleNet for payments between financial institutions and XRP Ledger to source liquidity (a product called ODL).
The XRP Ledger was developer in 2011 before Ripple existed. Ripple created RippleNet around 2015. RippleNet is usable by financial institutions. It is a permissioned, regulatory compliant network.
Coil uses the XRP Ledger
Xumm wallet only works with the XRP Ledger.
Clif, this is the first thing I've listened of you. But I'm seriously wondering if you were looking at the right codebase? The XRP Ledger is an open source, decentralised, permissionless, blockchain.
1) You say that the only use of XRP is as a central bank messaging system. Clearly it is not, as XRP is in widespread use at the moment, and central bank messaging system is certainly not one of those usecases. You know why? Of course you do, because you already answered why in the next point
2) I agree that XRP is not going to "replace" SWIFT. Why? Because the main purpose of SWIFT is as an intrabank messaging system, and the XRP Ledger (as you say) is not a messaging system. It is a payments settlement network. It allows peer to peer payments. RippleNet could possibly replace SWIFT, but not the XRP Ledger.
3) You claim that XRP "only works with the banks". Again, you have read the source code, so you know you are lying when you say this. XRP is permissionless and anyone can (and does) use it. The XRP Ledger has nothing intrinsically to do with banks whatsoever. Again, you know this as you have read the source code.
Thanks Clif!
There are a lot of savvy people on this channel, so I have a question that no one has answered so far, not my banker, not any other podcaster. It may seem simplistic and obvious to y'all, but so far no one can tell me if social security will collapse along with everything else. My major income is SS, as my pt job doesn't pay enough to live on. If SS dies, so will a lot of elders who are too old to work, or too infirm, etc. So this question is becoming crucial. Having said that, I can understand it might get paid by some crypto currency or debit card system from the CB , but as long as I can cash it out, I'm ok. As long as cash exists. Or I can transfer it to a different system. So, has any one got an understanding of what is the likely scenario?
My take is that the CB's plan is to use both SS and UBI, universal basic income, to force people into the CBDC system. They want us to be starving, cold, broke, and unemployed with no escape path. They will then offer payments in CBDC only to those people who accept biometric ID (the Mark) and abide by the corresponding social credit score. CB's do not want a cash alternative. They, via captured governments, want to be able to track, tax, and approve of every tiny transaction. Complete control.
Will there be another option offered by white hats? Are there white hats?
Our survival rests on how many people refuse and how long they refuse. By noncompliance we resisted the first attempt at the vax pass on smart phones. That was their proof of concept. The next test will be for all the marbles.
I'm hoping there will be an intermediate method to payments, providing SS survives. Getting out of the CB/FED is essential, so I"m hoping white hats will find a solution. Pure blood and staying that way. Biometric ID hasn't figured in postings lately; it may have fallen by the wayside. Midterms will determine the future, although not immediately.
Well stated.
Note, BIS has stated that the Central Banks can hold BTC up to 1% of their balance sheet.
We are moving to a era private money systems where you will need to decide when and how to pay for services or products with selective types of tokens.
The key will be to understanding which benefits you.
You need to remain as ‘private’ as you can with each wallet type and each operating system platform and each hardware wallet.
I'm not at the age yet,... I don't expect SS to be there for me... but, you've also reminded me of the parallel to this...
"if '[digital] food stamps and [digital] welfare' will collapse with everything else"
The covid fear propaganda and covid lockdowns and covid remdesivir killed a lot old people. So, it wouldn't surprise me if they let SS collapse.
On the other hand, with '[digital] food stamps and [digital] welfare'... I would say, select "outages" in "select regions" -- from time-to-time -- for when "riots and looting in the streets" need to be sparked
"I admitted I was powerless over a technical understanding of cryptocurrency." I am a moron in this regard, but I know enough to be thrilled that Clif is hopeful. I'm a very small potatoes HODLer, so all the more I need that BTC shizz to shoot back up. Here's what I need help understanding if anyone dare aid me, and if so thank you in advance: 🚨How does the central bank literally, in practical terms, cause the price of BTC to plummet? Are they DIRECTLY manipulating the price? If so, how, what's to stop anyone else/another entity from also doing so?🚨 (Probably everything I don't know about coding and technology, but if you wanna hear about adverbs, then I'm your man--so to speak.)
I need to stop worrying and to have hope, especially while I'm enduring the punishment inflicted on me by my blue industry. It's not just teachers doing what Project Veritas exposed; namely blackballing older and/or conservative teachers. It's also young indoctrinates who are taking over key positions in the book industry. They are icing out the elders, who are light-years ahead of them in industry skill and would never interfere with free expression. I digress. For me, an older broad by myself, it's important to be financially solvent, but I'm now back in debt. If someone would be so kind as to explain why/how Clif is right (and intuitively I KNOW he is!) about the near-future rebounding of crypto, it would help me shut down my internal monologue of personal doom. 🙏
Hi Clif High, regarding renewable energy, you never seem to mention storage of electricity via battery or hydro. Plus what about Wave and tidal energy, do you see any future development in this kind of technology?
Also what about virtual power plants, where roof top solar is distributed throughout local communities?
I really enjoy listening to you and have done since 2017.
All the best Clif. Mikee. @3mh
Types of Energy Storage:
Batteries
Thermal
Mechanical
Pumped hydro