What do you think about Ripple XRP? Many people think

that it will replace SWIFT payments 🤔

Swift will need to implement XRP or swift will die out

I'd say it is the reverse....there is no way Ripple will displace SWIFT. The whole sector has moved on with well funded stablecoins like Circle USDC and private stablecoins like JPM coin, and trial runs like Project Dunbar. Xrp lost its MoneyGram contract (which XRP funded out of its own funds) which is now working with USDC on Stellar. What is XRP even doing now?

swift is a regulated protocol by the old farts of the central bank. after the ukraine-russian war, other countries are more exposed to how vulnerable their economies are, by relying solely on swift which the usa controls

What is so special about Ripple's technology? If SWIFT adopts a cryptographic consensus mechanism, why Ripple's permissioned ledger? Why not Stellar (which is similar but non-permissioned) or any one of several other platforms that are not under SEC investigation...or Hedera which is now open sourced with increasingly robust bridges to the Ethereum ecosystem?...SWIFT does more than just transfer funds between accounts. It weaves together a system that functions with respect to existing regulations across many jurisdictions and provides for robust metadata rails adaptable to all these jurisdictions. When it matures as a publicly regulated company, platform-agnostic Circle might compete with SWIFT. I see that Ripple is intending to go public as a regulated company as well but that may be a little messy if under SEC sanction. For now crypto is aiming for MoneyGram and Western union business not SWIFT.

They’re tied up in that sec lawsuit and actually kicking ass. That’s the only thing that’s holding mass adoption back is clarity, SEC is withholding documents and stretching everything out. XRP actually has a lot of international banks waiting on the sidelines. They were just out in Davos and from the sound of it, they’re definitely about to integrate with Swift once the smoke clears.

Probably one of the single most important cases in regards to crypto. If XRP wins, we all win.

I seriously doubt it...but you know more than me. I have not followed Ripple's fortunes very closely...but what do they offer that Hedera does not?

What’s special about XRP is that it’s technology is specifically built for cross border payments and all of their partnerships and connections. They’re backed by some seriously powerful people. Time will tell but I see swift becoming obsolete within the next 5 years

Yeah I see what you’re seeing

But why not use anything else for cross border payments? I can send a penny worth of ħ to china in 3-5 seconds ultra securely with finality 10,000 times for $1 total. What more do I need to cross a border that xrp offers?

yeah? no. swift was founded and has its HQ in belgium, is operating under EU law. And centralbanks don‘t dictate the course by any means, many states and banks do.

They’ve been working directly with multiple banks for over 5 years. They’re way ahead of anyone else in this market

Hedera also has 4 huge banks - Standard, Shinhan, DBS, and Nomura on its board, plus FIS and eftpos payment professors. Seems like they’re also in the running.

I hear xrp people talk about inevitability, but not the competitive advantages (other than partnerships) their platform has. Meanwhile, Hedera is excelling and the base for many use cases, one of which is XRP’s supposed niche. I believe Hedera is an invasive species (in a good way haha). XRP is just one of the species to get choked out due to lack of ability to compete with Hedera’s cheapness, scalability, and fair ordering.

This

As with everything they have done, I believe Mance and Leemon agree with you and that thought went into the name of Hedera - an invasive vine that will take over if left to it’s own devices.

Think this totally misses the point of that case….SEC is trying to define XRP as a security as a precedent for crypto…whether you hold XRP or not, this case affects all of us. Ripple seeking clarity and standing their ground is showing how overreaching and corrupt the SEC is. Clarity is going to green light mass adoption for banks and ripple has tons of international financial institutions waiting they aren’t going anywhere.

Baseline in US law is the Howey Test and I don't think Hedera is necessarily free from a security definition but I think the SEC is looking to create a cut-out for non-security tokens and Hedera is trying to avoid flagrant violation of the Howey Test. But my point is about general professionalism. The banks and enterprises need professionaliam. Hedera provides that, ConsenSys provides that, SWIFT provides that. Ripple failed to provide that and Garlinghouse continues to shill XRP as an investment expected to appreciate in value and thumb his nose at the SEC. If a platform like Bitcoin or Ethereum is all in on anonymity and decentralization then by all means flaunt your refusal to cooperate with regulators. But if you are saying your value derives from your professionalism, integrity, and regulatory compliance, then you need to exhibit those qualities. Hedera has done so. Ripple has not. As a result they missed the boat. XRP is an also-ran at this point, its price floating on the ignorance of the market.

Agree but Bitcoin is not about annonimity and never was about decentralisation crap that was narrative that developers that took over were creating. Bitcoin works with law enforcement if needed, hence Bitcoin still exists. BTC on other hands is on more shaky ground with what they doing, but still ok for now.

Spot on

This is why, even if we leave out hedera as an option, I wouldn’t hold xrp.

That makes no sense. You often seem to be talking about a different bitcoin than the one we all know. Yes bitcoin is open source and forkable and some developers seek to use it in new more transparent or energy efficient iterations...but the bitcoin invented and put into motion by Satoshi (Nick Szabo and friends) was created with the explicit intention of creating an alternative libertarian payment system that could avoid governmental regulation and interference. BTC remains the clear expression of the original Bitcoin chain. If we refer to Bitcoin we are referring to BTC, anything else is a fork or a separate chain/project altogether.

cypherpunk manifesto agrees.

BTC is not even fork is already completely different system and was Bitcoin before, protocol doesn't change in Bitcoin. Szabo did not even had a clue Bitcoin was Touring comple and asked for paper to be written during that conference and paper was written. White paper was not written by some anarchist or cypherpunk. You won't find any thing about decentralisation or decentralised that Szabo and his friends would otherwise add. It was written by person that studied law and identities were mentioned in paper.

Believe what you want to believe. I think the case for Szabo's authorship is quite clear.

White paper was granted copyright, but no point of arguing, if you an other think BTC is Bitcoin good luck with that.

Any original publication retains IP rights by default. In this case those rights reside with a pseudonym representing the group of contributors referenced above most of whom were associated with the Cypherpunk listserv in the 1990s....Craig Wright not among them let it be said. He is a con artist.

Bitcoin was announced on cryptography mailing list and never not cypher punks mailing list. The people on that list were also from NSA, RSA, Homeland security, does not seem like anarchist to me. IP is IP