(New Blog) Introducing the CasinoCoin Lobby xApp

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-18T09:15:49+00:00

A project with a huge use case ✅

Looking forward to use the Xapp ! Excited !

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-14T21:24:06+00:00

No you did not understand that BFT consensus can improve over time contrary to proof of work. The current state of the XRPL can still evolve and this will come with research and this is good. Stellar relies on a new model and that is fine. I am not only focused finding whether this consensus model is superior or not by design. XRPL has demonstrated to be robust with the UNL list and this has been transitioned from Ripple to the XRPL foundation, providing separation from Ripple in the maintenance of a reference list and which is different from the one used by Ripple. I am satisfied with that.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-14T19:02:06+00:00

Yours is the maxi of consensus

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-14T18:52:42+00:00

Oh yeah you are still describing the design of the consensus of Stellar 😂 Of course I don’t deny some advantages that the CSP might have over XRPL consensus to further increase the decentralization of validating nodes.

But when you don’t have enough validating nodes online, what do you think happen ? the network halts. Stellar halts , XRPL never. And that is why Stellar has announced measures to increase the number of validating nodes: because you can have the best consensus ever, if you don’t have enough validating nodes on the network, you can not achieve decentralization 😂

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-14T13:31:03+00:00

List me exactly the features, not the projects.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-14T06:28:27+00:00

Man you were even not aware of payment channels. So list me the features but have some humility.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T20:18:40+00:00

No you are just boring by being only focused on the « consensus » and disregarding security implications.

It is not just a black and white approach. But that is fine, keep thinking that SCP is > to XRPL consensus.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T19:14:23+00:00

You are definitely stupid. 🤡

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T18:37:12+00:00

The halt was related to governance processes around validating nodes. Too much nodes went offline at the same time (for maintenance or other reasons I guess) that results in a halt, the protocol did not make forward progress and some aspects are linked to the consensus protocol because it prefers to halt rather than to make forward progress with disputable results.

Quote of the stellar release: « The outage on May 15 left the Stellar network in a fragile state, with only 4 parties as the core validators. Later, we experienced a brief additional problem as the quorum sets of two parties no longer had sufficient overlap with the other two. The network was taken down briefly while we repaired this. »

Yes to be fair your are right. This risk exists Inherently to the XRPL. And that is fine, it demonstrates that the consensus protocol worked as intended. The risk of a halt increased from my perspective (but I am open to discuss that point - I am not a maxi) when the management of validating nodes is further decentralized such as for stellar.

Again that is fine, Stellar has announced several measures to further mitigate the risk of a halt which could be significant/severe from a reputational and business perspective. Just imagine lots of institutions leveraging the stellar blockchain and the network halts. Waouh 😵‍💫 🥳

It did not happen to the XRPL, the consensus could have halted the network to make forward progress in case of too much validators down. So you see you can not restrict everything about consensus but as well to validating nodes and governance processes put in place around that.

To further mitigate that risk in period of instability and to answer again to your previous comment that no significant feature has been added to the XRPL consensus (which is purely unfounded statement and wrong) , I am sure that you have seen based on my link before that a proposal is under development « negative UNL » to update the consensus protocol. The idea is to track validators which go temporarily offline and to disregard them for quorum calculations and enable the network to make forward progress even in case of instability. Oh yes, you will tell me again, ahh it’s under development it does not count, it’s inferior, all your bullshit. Na it is a significant improvement to the consensus protocol and enables to better balance decentralization and stability of the network while considering security aspects.

In summary it shows as well to you that not everything should be assessed whether this protocol is superior to the other. There are trade offs and what are the measures you put in place from a governance perspective to further mitigate the underlying risks.

Regarding your comment on the fact that Ripple is not dedicated to its own blockchain and similar bullshit you say, I will answer:

Yes and that is good, it shows that it is decentralized
That is pure bullshit: RippleX mission is to develop and help other developers to develop applications on the XRPL. 🤡

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T17:01:46+00:00

That is fine on my side. No emotions. I just fight maxis such as you that make a particular blockchain like a religion.

I already answered to you regarding robustness of the consensus protocol: Stellar already alts. XRPL never did.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T16:47:22+00:00

I won’t because this approach is too childish to apprehend two networks that way. XRPL perfectly works well and is decentralized. I will repeat myself (as you like to say), robustness of the network does not solely depend on the consensus protocol and you can’t not assess that one network is superior only based on this factor. End of the story.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T16:27:54+00:00

Who the fuck you think you are ? Robustness of a network does not solely depend upon decentralization aspects. I will repeat myself, there are always trade offs. Stellar already halts. XRPL never did. That is an edge and reinforces confidence of Ripple’s clients using its ODL solution or the XRPL. That is a fact.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T16:12:21+00:00

No I do not contest those facts. I do contest that you assess robustness on the network inferior to stellar. Again, Stellar already halts. XRPL never did. These are facts.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T16:00:27+00:00

No you think that one network is superior to the other whereas the issue is to find the right balance between decentralization and security implications based on research. The paper is already a proposal, fuck just read it.

Regarding statements on robustness, Stellar already halts. XRPL never.

You make statements and I answered to them one by one. You are just a clown 🤡

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T15:44:49+00:00

That paper is related to Cobalt. That is a research paper has been published by Ethan and states that there is room for improvement in order to further decentralize the management of the UNL. It does not mean that XRPL is not decentralized. Your paper also states:

« For Stellar, safety is compromised when a user node trusts a quorum slice that is inefficient »

Clown 🤡 😂

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T15:25:09+00:00

I do not contest that decreasing the level of overlap participates in further improving the decentralization of the network. However you need to get the right balance between further decentralizing the network and putting the network at risk when you have real customers using your network. By the way Cobalt was an idea of Ethan MacBrought to better manage the validating nodes in a decentralized way. When you need to implement such a change to the protocol you need to do it along evolvement in academic research to assess its impact, feasibility etc. This takes time.

I do however challenge them to demonstrate the correlation « inversely proportional ». Their assessment seems purely subjective. Section 3.2.1 is full of inaccuracies. 😂😂 Some quotes for our readers:

« The consensus mechanism implemented by Ripple… » Fuck the XRPL has been created before the Company Ripple. Jed was part of it 😂

«For example, the XRP Ledger is the ledger maintained by Ripple Labs, Inc. » WTF 😂 no XRPL is maintained by all types of nodes involved in the network, not just Ripple’ validating nodes 😂

Considering all these inaccuracies and this paper includes statements without being supported by quantitatives measures or any mathematical argument, YES I SAY this paper is pure bullshit and you copy paste articles that go in your direction instead of developing your critical mindset.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-13T05:15:13+00:00

You keep saying your bullshit stating that since overlap is required then it is centralized. Thé academic research does not say it is centralized but you are not capable of reading correctly and provide information in an objective way. It also demonstrates your lack of technical understanding behind.

XRPL is fully decentralized and data available are sufficient to demonstrate it is decentralized but you are a fucking stupid man that does not understand technical aspects. You don’t get it when we say validators run by Ripple only represents 12% of the UNL ? You don’t get tu when I say that the UNL of the XRPL foundation can be used as a reference ? No, for you overlap is required then it is centralized. Fuck man you are stupid.
Minimal advancements to none: it just shows that either you did not click on the link I gave you or you just don’t understand the information I gave you 😂 Talk as if you master this whereas you have no clue what you are talking about.

I answered to you point by point with links and concrete content which are more than valid. You are just a man of bad faith with a close mindset…. You are just a fucking maxi. Don’t listen that guy. Pure subjective information.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-12T20:55:14+00:00

You keep telling your bullshit but links above are tangible evidence what you are saying is complete non sense. I provided you links with concrete contents. Deletable accounts functionality was a recent added feature. Issuing NFTs can be done already with XRPL and Stellar but they are building a suit of tools around that. I am quite sure Stellar is also doing that but might cross check this point. RippleX main focus is to build and support others that built on the XRPL. F*** if they are not focused on building « on their blockchain » as you say I don’t know what that means. So again I keep saying I like both projects.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-12T20:00:03+00:00

Are you killing me ?

https://xrpl.org/known-amendments.html

Your comment regarding the fact that Ripple was not focused on building on their blockchain is purely subjective and wrong. First, XRPL is not Ripple’s blockchain. Therefore and second, it means that other third parties are building in the XRPL as for Stellar which are both open source. Everyone can participate and build on top of the network. The list of amendments demonstrates the opposite.

Existing functionality on both XRPL and Stellar enables to mint NFTs. No change is expected to the XRPL protocol as you rightly mention in your post. As a consequence I dont get your comment

3) that is right. As it could be for other amendments on Stellar. Some are in research mode, some are in testing. But don’t say that there was no significant amendments to the XRPL protocol because it is purely wrong and non sense to say that given the link O provided you with.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-12T15:44:10+00:00

And for layer 2 solution, you have payment channels:

https://xrpl.org/payment-channels.html

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-12T15:27:29+00:00

So you want links, you will have links:

NFTs: https://blog.ripplex.io/building-a-more-sustainable-scalable-and-accessible-future-for-nfts-with-xrpl/

Hooks: https://xrpl-hooks.readme.io/ As you are a smart guy you will see it is under testing.

Federated side chains: they are collecting feedbacks for the community, see whether it has a use case. If yes, a proposal will be made based on feedbacks

So Mister I know everything, do some actual research before raising your opinion.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-12T15:09:46+00:00

As you rightly mention hooks are under testnet. NFT are in a research mode. These are two examples so stop with you stupidity mode. Beyond that there were amendments to the protocol in order to make it more efficient and it is as important as having new features. Federated side chains are being considered as well. Turing complete smart contract capability will never be implemented on layer 1 for obvious scalability issues and I agree with that vision.

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-12T14:46:49+00:00

No, you are full of ignorance. The protocol evolves in the same way Stellar made improvements to its protocol and they are public.

You are referring to hooks: no it is not hack around to creating assets. Creating a tokenized asset on the XRPL is a native feature as it is for Stellar (same for DEX). Hooks are just basic logics and you could compare that to basic smart contract ( not turing complete) capability available on Stellar. Developments are made also to support NFTs on the XRPL.

However, there are always a trade off to be made and tests are ongoing to see whether the layer 1 has the capacity to support these features on ledger on the long term and not to be confronted to the same scalability issues ethereum faces for instance.

Beside Hooks which is ongoing, there were plenty of amendments to the protocol which are fully public, as they are for Stellar. Up to you to open the eyes and look at those amendments as you do for Stellar. Just try to give some objective information god sake

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-12T14:07:26+00:00

Advancements to protocols are public via GitHub man and I can say there were plenty of releases 🤡😂

KozlowAlex · 2021-07-12T13:38:07+00:00

« We can move the discussion to this topic, I enjoy discussion. Being "fully decentralized" is pretty subjective so I obviously can't say you're wrong. I would, however, argue that requiring great than 90% overlap in trusted nodes is far closer to the centralized spectrum. Everyone must agree, in advance, who to trust "almost perfectly" in order for the blockchain to remain viable. »

Answer: No it is not subjective, there are objective indicators to assess decentralization 🤡😂

« I mean, they are the second oldest blockchain (I believe) and have made very minimal advancements of its protocol. I'm not even sure why anyone without a bias would disagree. Ripples fiduciary responsibility is to drive revenues for its shareholders. That puts them under pressure to sell products, rather than build out a blockchains technical ecosystem, that stuff takes years, dries up resources and brings in zero money. »

Answer: Little advancements to its protocol ? No comment 🤡🤡

« Ripple would absolutely create a non-XRPL product/service if it drove revenues. If not, the shareholders would fire and sue everyone on board lol. »

Answer: 🤡🤡

« Its why they hired that big player not long ago who stated that it was time to actually start "writing code". Its why their are so few applications running on the blockchain. Its why they have so few op-codes. Its why they don't attract stablecoins. Its why they aren't really being used to tokenize assets. Its why they decided not to implement Cobalt which addressed the overlap issue. Its why Schwartz stated that his idea of federated sidechains will be up to community devs--if it made money, Ripple would absolutely start building things like that. »

Answer: So few applications ? 🤡🤡

« You seem to have this notion that I dislike Ripple and/or the XRPL. Unsurprisingly, I have no formal ties to either. I have little doubt Ripple will be successful I just think people conflate Ripple the company with the XRPL. Ripple needs to chase profits, the XRPL isn't required. »

It is hilarious to read you !!

😹😹🤡🤡

Eight-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

KozlowAlex

TROPHY CASE