News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SEC charges Ripple and two executives by contingencies on Tuesday December 22, 2020 @05:40PM (#25512232)
Other comments are incorrect.

As I recall Ripple was originally a network-of-issuers for multiple issuer-specific tokens model, it wasn't supposed to be a single-issuer/single-token. The XRP token itself was never intended to be the asset, it was only a cost-token that fuelled the exchange of other issuers' tokens, similar to offline community exchange systems (CES). Ripple the company post-dates Ripple the project, which AFAIK was originally solidly non-commercial in motivation. I was part of the early commercialization of Ripple sort of by proxy while building Kraken, although I was opposed to the move. Aside from the money people, there were some good engineers involved with the right intentions, drawing from solid experience and with an awareness of CES and attempts at networking thereof.

The whole central banking thing was a post-facto marketing push as crypto went mainstream AFAIK. I believe some of the people changed at some point, but I didn't have time to focus on Ripple and never met them. I believe the Ripple narrative mirrors my overall experience with crypto: nice technical ideas by people with positive social visions, suddenly people get paid to do it, utopian visions rapidly replaced with money people, regulatory ingress effectively destroys the USP, whole thing turns in to a scam, regulations become warped in to a system of protectionism and government effectively in cahoots with the dominant players. A real education in human behavior.

Re:SEC charges Ripple and two executives by PragmaticPulp on Tuesday December 22, 2020 @05:58PM (#25512424)
The SEC is clearly suing Ripple the company here. We’re all talking about this part of your comment, which doesn’t really disagree with the other comments:

> whole thing turns in to a scam

Ironically, the narrative that Ripple the project was unrelated to Ripple, the scammy company, was also frequently used to hype XRP in the early days.

It was a convenient way to give two narratives to the same cryptocurrency. People could either choose to believe in the Ripple (the company) banking system, or they could choose to believe in Ripple (the project, the technology). Win-win for speculators.

Re:SEC charges Ripple and two executives by contingencies on Tuesday December 22, 2020 @06:15PM (#25512582)
Just read this other thread it corrects the misinformation here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25502764
Re:SEC charges Ripple and two executives by PragmaticPulp on Tuesday December 22, 2020 @09:35PM (#25513804)
Other thread seems to agree that the modern version of Ripple, the version being sued by the SEC and the version of XRP that cryptocurrency speculators have been trading, is problematic.

No one is really disagreeing that Ripple was something else entirely before it became the popular Ripple/XRP scam, but that doesn't really matter in the context of this SEC lawsuit.

Re:SEC charges Ripple and two executives by TheColorYellow on Tuesday December 22, 2020 @07:02PM (#25512932)
This is true. Especially if you look at what Jed Mcaleb helped to cocreate with Stellar, you can see the original idea of Ripple expressed clearly in what has been done with XLM.