Xrp vs link

You will never get normies to accept a decentralized system. Period.

Centralized & regulated means recourse. If someone "robs" Chase bank I am insured 6 ways from Sunday. If someone robs a crypto exchange I'm simply fucked.

Good luck with that.

That's what I think the future will hold: You'll see the "Centralized for Normies" shit and you'll see the Open Source Blockchain for the rest of us.

That may be true, but your "decentralized" market will never expand beyond internet NEETS. 99% of the planet won't know about it nor care to put their money in a market with no legal protections. I hate to break it to you, but that 99% holds most of the $$.

True, but that's what I am saying: You'll have banks adopting some aspects of blockchain technology and that'll be the "blockchain for normies" part. So it'll have the protection offered by banks, etc. I already see something on Microsoft's site: "Blockchain as a Service", etc.

Sorry user, I misread your post.

How long of a long-term hold? I don't like that it's got the jews behind it, but I don't care much either. I don't think their world is stable and is bound to fall, so better accrue wealth and prepare for what's coming than worry too much about how you're making that money.

1-3 years.

But you need to consider the market they are targeting - international money transfers. This is a $5 trillion+ PER DAY market. They have ~100 banks onboard testing and/or implementing their tech. They have 200 employees. They sit on a Federal Reserve task force. They are SEC registered.

Name ANY other crypto that can make these claims.

(Protip: None.)

You're case is very strong, user. Going to sleep on it and look up some more tomorrow. I was very impressed by their website as well.

Your ;_;

Definitely sleep on it and DYOD. I'll be the first to day don't listen to any bullshit on biz. But if you do the research I think you'll be amazed. I say this as someone who ignored Ripple for years until I realized wtf they were actually doing.

Are you retarded? Links built a working product long before xrp. Go to smartcontract.com and use their smart contracts

> Links built a working product long before xrp.

Link existed before 2012? Wat?

The token may be good, the website may be good, the whole idea may be good. But the goal for Ripple is to keep their token balanced. Banks don't want a currency that's fluctuating so much. Ripple doesn't want price swings and will try to stop that, so don't expect to get rich from XRP because that is literally what they want to avoid.

They've addressed this. They're called "market makers". Happy to explain if you need an explanation.

I would like an explanation.

>Middleware Oracle built on ethereum
Chainlink can be used on a multitude of blockchains.
Like Hyperledger in SWIFT's case.

Ok... "market makers" are institutions that play the market volatility.

Now, Ripple is -failry- stable in price as it is. You probably notice from day to day it generally doesn't change a whole hell of a lot - fractions of a cent at most. But on say a $10 million transaction those fractions of a cent can mean significant $$. So what a "market maker" does is it guarantees the transactee a price, and it plays the difference in the hope to gain money.

To oversimplify: Say Bank A wants to send $1 million to Bank B w/ XRP at 10 cents. The market maker guarantees the transaction @ 10 cents. Bank A and Bank B are both happy because the market maker assumes all the risk. During the course of the transaction, XRP jumps to 10.1 cents. The market maker just made $100,000 dollars.

Of course the inverse can happen, and this is an extremely simplified exampled... but basically the market maker is betting they can make more positives than negatives.

I meant $10,000... not $100,000, but you follow my drift....

Am I missing something? How would a market maker institution losing or gaining money by burdening the risk of the transaction make me as an XRP holder rich?

the market maker has nothing to do with your personal holdings... not sure where you go that from?

Lol, enjoy holding XRP bags that is artificially inflated by the foundation.

>make a coin, sell it, coin does nothing, buy back coins at cheap prices because they are below what you initially offered them for, price sky rockets, retards buy in, profit

Wow... you literally have no idea what you're talking about.

>Ripple doesn't want price swings and will try to stop that, so don't expect to get rich from XRP because that is literally what they want to avoid.

That was your answer to this user, specifically to that particular line and your answer was >They've addressed this

So if Ripple wants a stable currency to get the banks on board, what is the merit in investing XRP early only for it to be worth a fraction of an X more after years of holding? If the market makers are not going to make you rich, who will?

If getting rich is not the goal, what was the point of your answer to begin with?

>You will never get normies to accept a decentralized system. Period.
Banks are tripping over themselves to adopt decentralized systems.

See coindesk.com/barclays-joins-cls-blockchain-consortium-search-swift-alternative/
This is a bunch of major companies looking towards alternatives since they seem to think SWIFT isn't implementing blockchain solutions fast enough.

Here's a key line from that article outlining what they want:
>The highest level [of the blockchain implementation roadmap] would see transactions being fully reliant on distributed ledgers without a centralized backup system.
Key words: "distributed" and "not centralized".

Heres a scenario:

>COMPANY A sends money to COMPANY B.
>Using CHAINLINK network COMPANY A sends $1,000,000 to COMPANY B.
>Transaction is sent and price fluctuates lets say 1.5%
>COMPANY B receives $15,000 less than the initial transaction.

How does CHAINLINK solve this issue?

You completely misunderstood what this guy was saying.

The "market maker" thing had nothing to do with his concern.

coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ripple/

wolles-bucket.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/

cnbc.com/2017/07/21/ripples-xrp-digital-currency-rose-3977-percent-in-the-first-half-of-2017.html

cnbc.com/2017/05/26/bitcoin-rival-ripple-is-sitting-on-many-billions-of-dollars-of-xrp.html

Ripple payment protocol and XRP are different

Ripple company holds 62% percent of all XRP

XRP is not needed by the banks

Lets be real, you fucking retards bought this shit at ATH and got fucking played.

Stay poor though

I was referring to his statement that "Ripple aims to keep a balanced token".

Yes, they do. That doesn't mean they've set a predetermined price. If you want a really simple argument to that notion: the majority holders of XRP are Ripple employees. What sense would it make for them to want the price to remain low and stagnant?

>What's the merit in investing in XRP early

Because the price to the BANK doesn't matter. If a bank wants to send $1 million to another bank, whether XRP is 10 cents or $1 is irrelevant. THEY are still spending $1 million regardless. What you need to focus on is what the price of XRP needs to be to facilitate the liquidity necessary to facilitate a $5 trillion market.

Do I think Ripple will get ALL of it? No. But if they facilitate even 10% of it, their token needs to be worth the appropriate value to accommodate it.

Follow?

The oracle node network is compensated in LINK, you don't do transactions in LINK bro. Not unless you're actually trading LINK.

The transaction itself can be literally anything.

This is the stablecoin problem. It's a total tangent to chainlink

So if the market maker doesn't address the "getting rich with your personal holdings through a long term hold" part, why is this conversation still going? I thought the point of Veeky Forums was for anons to make money first, unless XRP can in fact grow and get you some nice gains in the long run, but that's the part I'm doubtful about so you're welcome to explain that part if there's anything left to explain.

Hey, don't ask me. I think Ripple is shit.

Node operators are paid in link tokens which facilitate the oracle being trustworthy.

They're not using link as a transactional cost. They're using eth to fiat... Omg to btc.. fiat to fiat..

Xrp has no use as a token. End of discussion.

Node operators get paid in link and cash out at market value. Btc miners cash out at market value. Eth miners cash out market value

Make sense?

>XRP is not needed by the banks

This has been addressed so many fucking times it's a wonder it still gets brought up, but it's all the fudders have.

News flash: YOU'RE RIGHT. XRP IS NOT NEEDED BY THE BANKS.

HOWEVER: Good luck getting JP Morgan to accept a token issued by Bank Of America. THAT'S THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT. Ripple/XRP is a neutral 3rd party, just like SWIFT.

God DAMN can you fucks not spend 10 seconds on Google?

And no, I didn't buy at ATH. Matter of fact I bought at about 3 cents and have made 500%+, and I think orders of magnitude are still to come. Unlike you fucking shills I'm actually sharing legit and verifiable info on an established company with 200 fucking employees and hundreds of millions in VC funding unlike your fucking vaporware "crypto of the week" bullshit.

Oh all right, got it now. Thanks for trying to explain it to all of us.

So realistically what could be the potential value of link tokens?

Oh right you mean the deleted article posted by Ripple that states that the settlement layer of the protocol does not require XRP.

Stay retarded.

Yeah my bad, I mixed the color of your tags.

Well if xrp was valued at .002 cents the beginning of the year and 100x since then to .20cents i can safely say link will 100x to 10$.

But since link tokens will actually have a use instead of xrp and ethereum 2000x roughly since it launched one can only imagine link potentially going to 100$

Jesus Christ, how fucking retarded are you, really? I just fucking said that.

I'll say it again, for everyone in this thread: XRP is NOT needed to facilitate or settle transactions across the RCL. You happy now cocksucker?

Now, why WOULD banks use XRP?

1) Because, as mentioned before, it's a token issued by a neutral 3rd party as opposed to a competitor.

2) It saves 60% on remittance costs.

So it boils down to this:

1a) Show me banks that trust eachother
2a) Show me banks that don't like to save money

If you can't do that, then XRP has a use case. Period. This isn't fucking rocket surgery.

If they're actually going to be used to perform smart contracts in the mainstream world (like Nick Szabo envisioned them), there's really no telling.
"Huge" wouldn't begin to describe it.

Btw, there are two ways Chainlink can achieve mainstream adoption:
1) top down
>e.g. SWIFT implementing LINK among its network

2) bottom up
>more and more people and organizations start using LINK to implement smart contracts, which are faster and more secure and allow for the removal of several middlemen

Either way, LINK is just as viable in a 100% crypto world as it is in the majority fiat world of today.

Old-world financial institutions like SWIFT need blockchain solutions like LINK.
LINK does not need institutions like SWIFT.

But that's where you got cucked sucker lol

You're holding bags that have no use other than to give ripple money to have Banks use their services. Which they got a long time ago

I just stated that XRP isn't required to be used on the Ripple settlement protocol.

The banks can send each other shit and just pay the transfer fee.

XRP has no value besides you guys getting manipulated into buying that shit cause you guys are fucking retarded

>Bank A wants to send 1 million, buys 1 million in XRP, sends 1 million in XRP to Bank B, Bank B converts 1 million in XRP to fiat

You realize how fucking retarded you sound?

>Ripple
>neutral 3rd party

Ripple is a centralized monstrosity, it can never be neutral.

The LINK network on the other hand is decentralized from the ground up.

>Show me banks that trust eachother
Exactly.
They don't trust each other, and they certainly don't trust centralized middlemen like Ripple.
So they desperately want trustless systems like the blockchain.

Ripple introduces a centralized (i.e. non-trustless) step in between the banks and the trustless blockchain, completely defeating the purpose.

My "retardedness" has gained me over 500%. Guess I'm doing something right.

>They don't trust each other, and they certainly don't trust centralized middlemen like Ripple.
>Except for SWIFT

holy shit you might be the dumbest one to tread in here yet....

Thank you.
This is why Link's overtaking xrp.
This is why xrp bag hodlers are clinging desperately to fud

By cucking other people into a useless token lol

This is why icos are considered scams when their token is useless

500% gains on your investment of 10 bucks.

Lets play a game, I will show you how much LINK I have and you show me how much XRP you have.

They don't trust each other either, but they still work with each other.
Way to miss the point, which is they'd rather not have to trust anyone.

Also, SWIFT is merely the communication vessel, not a replacement for the entire legacy finance infrastructure like Ripple wants/needs to be.

>still with the banks love decentralization meme
Clueless. Absolutely clueless.

Decentralization means they don't have to trust another centralized institution.

You really should look into this more. A LOT more.

That's the problem. In order for ripple to actually be successful. They need institutions to completely mold and adopt ripple

Chainlink is molding to institutions to fit their need to connect to the blockchain

Why bother building entirely new systems with ripple when i can use my heavily invested system and use chainlink as a middleware saving me millions

Decentralized.. big reason we're using crypto buddy

More like my investment of $5k, but whatever floats your boat. I got nothing to prove to some tards on biz. I simply try to present some real opportunities as opposed to the constant shilling of scamshit.

The tools are being created so others can easily create their own blockchains from an existing open source platform. It was showcased at SIBOS a couple years ago. And it has greater backing than chainlink ever will.
Do your research.

>banks still hate decentralization

That is actually believable, I thought you were gonna flex nuts and I was gonna flex nuts and it would come to a show down and I would have to show you half a mil in LINK, but I admire the honesty.

>I simply try to present some real opportunities as opposed to the constant shilling of scamshit.
Good to see you turned your back on Ripple and joined the LINKtrain!

If decentralization is good then why is axa crippling blockchain so they can force lightning network?

Are you talking about hyperledger, something every major player is part of and ChainLink is native too?

You literally have no idea what Chainlink does.
It's the link between mainstream transactions and blockchains. The idea is for it to work with any blockchain.

And god help you if you're talking about hyperleger.

>banks still hate decentralization
See

Fair enough.

I'll probably invest in link on the off chance they make some headway in the financial world, but I'm not going to pretend or shill they have any leg up on Ripple because they simply don't. I'm not a maximalist, I'm a realist. Link has a long way to go.

Decentralization is the reason we're using crypto. Buy the fact of the matter is it's currently a slow process with verifying before a transaction completes.

The whole lightning thing is to help faster transaction times by being off chain but still requires to connect back to the chain.

Nope.

>still pushing muh banks love decentralization meme
See Big money does not want decentralization.

Link is plug and play and is decentralized.
Ripple requires a complete overhaul and is centralized.

Banks are tripping over themselves to adopt decentralized systems.

See coindesk.com/barclays-joins-cls-blockchain-consortium-search-swift-alternative/
This is a bunch of major companies looking towards alternatives since they seem to think SWIFT isn't implementing blockchain solutions fast enough.

Here's a key line from that article outlining what they want:
>The highest level [of the blockchain implementation roadmap] would see transactions being fully reliant on distributed ledgers without a centralized backup system.
Key words: "distributed" and "not centralized".

>Banks are tripping over themselves to adopt decentralized systems.

Nonsense. Banks are accountable to their customers. A decentralized system holds no accountability.

Sorry, you're just... wrong. And I don't give a flying fuck what some backwater article says. Customers want recourse if they're fucked out of their money. A decentralized system provides them none, as such they will never adopt it.

Why would there be no accountability? What are you talking about?

my buddy said some hedge funds were buying up LINK to corner the market?

Let me make this really simple....

If someone hacks your bitcoin wallet - what can you do about it?

The fuck do bitcoin wallets have to do with this?

>Someone hacks the company that houses everyones credit report

>Someone hacks the company that regulates securities to make beneficial trades

What can you do about it?

>Someone hacks the company that houses everyones credit report

There is a specific, licensed and registered entity that you can sue, which is happening right now. This is called recourse.

Who do you sue when someone steals your bitcoin?

So when the class action law suit happens and you get a 12 cent check in that mail, is that worth your entire real identity floating around the darknet?

Are you implying if digital assests get adopted that there won't be some FDIC to protect you?

>support.coinbase.com/customer/portal/articles/1662379-how-is-coinbase-insured-

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Before you go muh private wallet, if someone breaks into your house and steals a stack of hundreds you been stuffing under the mattress you think you have some actual legal recourse to get that money back?

>Are you implying if digital assests get adopted that there won't be some FDIC to protect you?

That RIGHT THERE implies centralization. That's what you crypto-maximalists don't get.

Your damn right cryptos will likely be the future. Your damn right banks will likely adopt them.

Where you're damn WRONG is this thought process that they will remain "decentralized". You want FDIC protection? That means regulation. Regulation means centralization. I can't make it any simpler than this.

Oh and per your question

> if someone breaks into your house and steals a stack of hundreds you been stuffing under the mattress you think you have some actual legal recourse to get that money back?

I DO. It's called homeowners insurance. There is criteria to be met, but believe me it's more than possible.

There's your centralization again.

Ripplers are on the level of delusion as the arkies

Get out while you can, for the love of god

You do realize there is a difference between a centralized method to protect consumers and a decentralized system of data right? I mean you cannot be this fucking autistic.

insurancequotes.com/home/will-homeowners-insurance-cover-cash

You are also implying you couldn't get your intangible assets insured.

Also have fun getting 200 bucks back.

Do you just wake up and just spout nonsense?

Getting back to the topic.

Xrp serves no use as a token. You're buying and selling serves no use other than to dump on other people who don't know they're holding worthless bags.
Ripple got their money long ago.

>I googled a random backwater insurance article so I know what I'm talking about.

You ignorant, underage, non-home owning twat. My homeowner's policy exceeds my net worth by $50,000. If I had more, I'd up my policy. I can make claim against the WHOLE FUCKING AMOUNT.

God you fucking millennial retards and your absolute lack of basic life fundamentals really piss me the fuck off sometimes....

Clearly never been a homeowner. Ever. I don't even agree with the guy you're arguing with but you, sir, are a fucking idiot. Shut up.

Dude banks are tripping over each other to adopt blockchain technology, you're out of your element

cnbc.com/2017/06/26/ibm-building-blockchain-for-seven-major-banks-trade-finance.html

jpmorgan.com/global/Quorum