Coinbase to Suspend Trading in XRP

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-coinbase-xrp/coinbase-to-suspend-trading-in-xrp-idUSKBN292222

by mamby • 6 years ago

129 188 6 years ago

kylebenzle• 6 years ago

They never should have allowed it in the first place. By testing the waters of trading custodial currencies they were really pushing the limits.

BTC has been a joke ever since the GitHub repo was hijacked by Blockstream and Adam Back. The only interesting cryptocurrencies are Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash and Monero. The rest are either obvious scams or dead ends at this point.

A lot of people were holding out hope for decentalized storage projects like FileCoin but that project now seems to be dead in the water as well.

37ef_ced3• 6 years ago

The above shouldn't be downvoted. It's an interesting statement

What do you think of the Lightning Network?

Lightning Network channels specify a blockchain hash, so Bitcoin is supported but other cryptocurrencies could be used (if the HTLC scripts, etc., were ported)

The Lightning Network web of payment channels looks good to me. You can see how it can form an efficient "overlay" on any cryptocurrency that provides sufficient scripting power:

https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf

etrabroline9• 6 years ago

Lightning is not reliable the way Bitcoin is, and correspondingly has not seen any real-world adoption. It is effectively dead.

splintercell2• 6 years ago

I find LN's UX really painful. Ethereum's layer 2 solutions are far ahead in terms of user experience. The other day I had to settle an election bet, and either I settle it in stablecoin on high tx fees of ETH/BTC or try explaining one of the layer-2 solutions.

And no, I can't pay them in USDT on bch because that requires them to get a new wallet.

Raiden network which is Ethereum's LN like solution, faces the same problem. Whatever bitcoin folks envision, they will never get LN bitcoins to have the same network effect as bitcoin itself.

logicslave2• 6 years ago

I thought filecoin had a successful launch?

ceejayoz• 6 years ago

https://www.axios.com/filecoin-blockchain-delay-3b5e6b9a-bcc...

briefcomment• 6 years ago

“BTC has been a joke ever since the GitHub repo was hijacked by Blockstream and Adam Back”

Could you spell out the implications of this?

est31• 6 years ago

I don't think there are any major implications. The point of blockchain currencies is to be decentralized so hacking a random github repo shouldn't have major implications. It's not even the only bitcoin node implementation out there at this point.

whoisninja• 6 years ago

misinformed take

Blockstream has almost no say at this point

some of the top contributors are either independent or work with Chaincode labs

over the last 10 years, Bitcoin is the most resilient to protocol changes and centralization

Ethereum, Bitcoin cash and Monero are all either centralized or bad implementations

etrabroline9• 6 years ago

Wall Street doesn't want Bitcoin to serve its intended purpose of removing their control over the money supply. They did this by co-opting the software project with venture capital money and making technical decisions that make Bitcoin ecommerce economically infeasible due to high fees. Initially they intended to replace Bitcoin with an alt-coin whose issuance was controlled by the Blockstream corporate entity. That project failed, and wall street investors pivoted to another alt-coin called Lightning that has failed to produce a reliable payment network after 7 years of investment, all the while the BTC fork remains unusable, which they are just fine with.

EDIT: The Lightning network markets itself as an improvement to Bitcoin, but it is a completely alternative settlement network that just happens to denominate in BTC. I don't think debating the use of the term "alt-coin" is material.

chemmail• 6 years ago

Blockstream bought out most of the the btc devs who had commit ability. Their end goal is to cripple btc to where it is today. The goal of this is to build an unnecessary product they can charge for on a second level. Think skimming money like charge cards do, but offering no real advantage or service beyond that. So far they have found building a new network neigh impossible. Hence the memes: Lightning only 18 months away, after 3 years of "development." You can find hilarious round table interviews with Adam Back where one asks how they can use btc for transactions like at bars with the fees dwarfing the regular transaction. Adam Back suggested using an IOU network out of paper or maybe build an IOU app for that. Can you believe that? Hilarious!

gnrl2• 6 years ago

I don't see any additional value of bcash over bitcoin. Eth and Monero I agree though, each of them bring fundamental values additionally to btc.

spurgu• 6 years ago

The argument as far as I'm aware is that it's like Bitcoin, except with transaction fees low enough to make it actually usable as a currency as opposed to being a pure store of value.

splintercell2• 6 years ago

Bitcoin cash is the only cryptocurrency I have regularly used in the past 3-4 years. Almost all the crypto payment options support bch seamlessly (because they aim to integrate bitcoin which results in no-effort integration of bitcoin cash).

I just can never get myself to pay the tx fees of bitcoin or ether. I recently discover that USDT exists on bch (but BitPay doesn't accept bch usdt) so I keep USDT on BCH and do JIT swaps to BCH and make almost zero fee payments.

Just to be clear, BCH will never dethrone BTC, but BCH is becoming a defacto layer 2 solution for Bitcoin. Now there are tokens and NFT tokens on BCH too.

jamoes5• 6 years ago

I'm curious why you chose to use the term "bcash" to refer to BCH. No exchanges or mainstream projects use that term to refer to BCH. As far as I'm aware it's primarily used as a pejorative, so it seems strange that you'd use it here.

As far as BCH's additional value: I'd suggest researching the block size debate. This debate is BCH's entire reason for existing. This article [1] from 2016 by Mike Hearn contains a good primer on the block size debate itself. He ended up quitting development of Bitcoin, but others decided to raise the blocksize limit - with or without the majority, thus creating BCH. Succinctly, BCH is the continuation of big-blocker's vision of the Bitcoin experiment.

[1] https://blog.plan99.net/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experi...

traceddd• 6 years ago

It says more about bcash than bitcoin that it’s supporters feel the need to push a (false) narrative anywhere they can.

seibelj4• 6 years ago

This is clearly FUD pushed by bitcoin cash supporters. I’m coin-agnostic and don’t get into these fights but bitcoin is 100% doing exactly what it was designed to do.

etrabroline9• 6 years ago

bitcoin is 100% doing exactly what it was designed to do

Bitcoin was designed to allow low-fee small amount internet commerce. From the first paragraph of Satoshi's white paper:

The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions [emphasis added]

This is clearly no longer the case with the BTC fork of Bitcoin:

https://privacypros.io/tools/bitcoin-fee-estimator/

Therefore BTC is not doing what it was designed to do.

lhl2• 6 years ago

Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System - “The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions, and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non-reversible services.” https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Average transaction fees are frequently $5-10 these days, which completely invalidates the original proposed use case for a system that would enable “small casual transactions.” https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactionfees...

Since transactions will only increase in price as demand grows (and the tx limit has been effectively capped for years), I don’t see Bitcoin ever improving in this regard. Bitcoin may be successful as a speculative asset and for other purposes, but as “peer-to-peer electronic cash” it’s a failure.

grubles4• 6 years ago

Just to note: the "Bitcoin was hijacked by <corp>" is a running joke at this point and not to be taken seriously. Ask anyone to provide verifiable proof of this and they will respond with hyperbole or conspiracy theory.

FreeTrade6• 6 years ago

I'm seeing a lot of valid concerns and criticisms of Blockstream's actions and methods. I dont think they can be dismissed with ad hominems.

kallewoof3• 6 years ago

The Blockstream hijack lie is getting really old.

And it doesn't age well either. Both gmax and pieter are not even in it anymore. Blockstream's contributions (what you consider 'hijacking') to Bitcoin are pretty slim at this point.

Which is a pity, honestly. Blockstream was a good force for bitcoin, despite the continuous stream of baseless lies coming from you people.

Gmax made a much better summary of why your statements are all baseless babbling below...

gotem3• 6 years ago

Wow. Does Coinbase plan to launch their coin and feel threatened? Seems like a anti-competitive move if so and weird timing with the IPO.

mariocesar2• 6 years ago

Cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase Inc said on Monday it would suspend trading in cryptocurrency XRP after U.S. regulators last week charged associated blockchain firm Ripple with conducting a $1.3 billion unregistered securities offering.

It reads to be a good reason to suspend XRP trading

gotem3• 6 years ago

Sorry, missed that somehow. Still seems oddly suspicious that it coincides with Coinbase's IPO.

howlgarnish• 6 years ago

Ripple/XRP is under SEC investigation for selling an unregistered security, Coinbase has to stop trading or they'll be an accessory to the crime as well.

ars• 6 years ago

Price chart: https://www.coindesk.com/price/xrp down about 18%.

arcticbull7• 6 years ago

Down about 60% in a week.

revel2• 6 years ago

Terrible news for XRP and Ripple but nobody can be surprised by this. Next up we may see the delisting of some stable coins given the SEC's advice about establishing a nexus in the US. I'm not sure how this will work for a decentralized coin like maker / dai, so perhaps this is the end for them. However, this seems consistent with other regulation since they operate like an autonomous fx swap fund.

academi• 6 years ago

I’m surprised, because I don’t see how it contributes to the market.

revel2• 6 years ago

This provides clarity on what constitutes a security. The SEC have been telegraphing this move for several years, ever since the crackdowns on ICOs and STOs. Bitstamp said they would delist XRP several days ago so coinbase are hardly unique in their response to the SEC's announcement.

jMyles2• 6 years ago

There can be no doubt that a mathematic - rather than collateralized - solution to stablecoins is the nonviolent solution.

pjkundert• 6 years ago

How about both collateralized and mathematical?

If the platform supports programmatic proportional issuance and withdrawal (vs. mint and burn), vs. market-priced collateral, then negative-feedback loop controlled inflation/deflation can be implemented...

dnpp1232• 6 years ago

IMHO good move for the ecosystem overall.

Beyond that, the formulation is really funny (bad?) though:

Trading will move into limit only starting December 28, 2020 at 2:30 PM PST, and will be fully suspended on Tuesday, January 19, 2021 at 10 a.m. Pacific Standard Time

Assuming limit only == post only orders (which sounds like it in the sentence), how do you expect the trading to work?

pontus• 6 years ago

Assuming you could still have limit orders cross the spread maybe?

dnpp1232• 6 years ago

Yes I guess too haha

Unless they limit the right of market orders to themselves^^

ineedasername16• 6 years ago

This is the paradox of wanting crypto to be both widespread and free of government influence. It cannot gain "market share" without interacting in some form or fashion with the regulatory structures already in place, putting it under de facto regulation of any jurisdiction of the people who want to use it.

jeofken13• 6 years ago

The best case would be a parallel economy developing, where you can hide yourself from government. No burglar can cost you as much as government. I sadly have yet to find a client for coding who wants to pay in crypto and not report it to the state...

juancampa• 6 years ago

Would you consider that be unethical?

root_axis2• 6 years ago

lol, how do you propose to power your mining rig and connect to the internet without a government?

ineedasername16• 6 years ago

That would only work on a small scale. Large scale, truly massive adoption can't occur until the major financial institutions are on board. If businesses can't legally accept it, put it in a bank, make loan payments with it, all of the normal things you do with money-- or have off ramps to convert to currency to allow that-- then you won't get widespread adoption.

sokoloff• 6 years ago

Without you giving a discount equal to their marginal tax rate, they would likely be both complicit in tax fraud and paying more after taxes.

seibelj4• 6 years ago

XRP is centralized - it was issued by a centralized corporation, the ledger is permissioned (which is why it’s so fast) so not just anyone can join the network in a meaningful way, and the way it was distributed is highly suspect.

Cryptocurrencies like bitcoin are entirely different. Ripple is not like bitcoin and the regulations of the USA and other countries will affect bitcoin’s value but not determine bitcoin’s continuing existence unlike XRP.

greggturkington• 6 years ago

This is also why the SEC can sue Ripple but not, say, Vitalik Buterin. They specifically do not consider BTC, ETH and other currencies as securities.

noxer8• 6 years ago

XRP is centralized

Useless statement XRP is the token there is no definition what makes the token centralized or not. Half the tokens owned by one party? or maybe a quarter is enough already? Its a useless statement as there is no common definition. no one talks about token decentralization anyway. Its about the control over the network that should not be centralized.

the ledger is permissioned

This is factually wrong. Anyone can transact on the ledger there is no permission required form anyone and no one has the power to exclude someone.

so not just anyone can join the network in a meaningful way

Also factually wrong. You can "join" the network in any possible way (node/full node/validator/participant/developer/you name it). You can change the code and send in you amendment. If 80% think is worth adding its added. If not its probably because the proposal was garbage not because someone has the power to block your amendment. So far there has been 1 amendment not supported by ripple that still reached the 80% support. Ripple could do absolutely nothing against that.

XRPs existence is also not determined by the USA. XRP would exist without ripple or the USA as long some people run the software it exists. Even if all would go offline it could be restarted any time.

shawnz3• 6 years ago

I don't think it is a paradox at all but simply a separation of concerns. I believe government regulation is essential to a healthy economy, but it can still be useful to have methods to store and transact value outside of centralized control in case there is a failure of government.

It's kind of like how the fourth amendment makes it easier to commit crimes, but we accept it as a society anyway because it is more important to provide opportunities for individuals to defend themselves against government overreach. It is part of the checks and balances that ensure a healthy democracy.

pmiller23• 6 years ago

What exactly makes XRP worth anything, though? Isn't it theoretically pegged to the USD?

nepthar• 6 years ago

I agree. There is nothing to suggest that something can't both behave in a regulatory environment and exist if that environment fails. Cars, for instance - They require registration so long as the body enforcing registration exists. If that changes, cars can still run.

sneak• 6 years ago

Color me surprised that it was XRP before USDT.

When Tether stops creaking and finally falls, it is going to make a HUGE mess.

1f60c• 6 years ago

For the record, Coinbase has never had support for Tether.

ashconnor• 6 years ago

Won’t they just flee to Gemnini’s stablecoin?

programmerslave2• 6 years ago

As soon as Bitcoin market cap starts shooting up, the SEC starts banning coins and increasing regulation. It’s a correlation as clear as day. The US government is actively trying to suppress Bitcoin/crypto growth. This is no coincidence

onethought2• 6 years ago

But they aren't banning bitcoin though :\ Wouldn't that be the way to suppress it?

unwoundmouse• 6 years ago

They don't have great legal grounds to attack bitcoin imo, only threat to national security or treason or some bs

pluc• 6 years ago

Take your tinfoil hat off, the SEC might time their interventions but a scam is a scam.

lhl2• 6 years ago

On the contrary, one could argue that the drop in XRP prices (and corresponding outflow of capital) has been one key drivers of the successive ATHs BTC has hit this week.

Longer term, there are many other tokens/protocols that can fulfill XRP’s functions without its obvious weaknesses.

etrabroline9• 6 years ago

The US government is actively trying to suppress Bitcoin/crypto growth

It's complicated. US regulators would absolutely ban all crypto if it started threatening the dollar and they had no other choice. However right now that isn't happening, and they are actually only going after pretty clear cases of fraud, which it seems like XRP was doing.

aazaa2• 6 years ago

The most surprising thing is how little this announcement has moved the USD exchange rate (~$0.25). That rate is about where it was last month.

https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/XRPUSD/?exchange=BITFINE...

Yes, there was a big run-up, but that was largely drafting off the increase in the bitcoin exchange rate. The real test will be how much further XRP drops (or doesn't) from here.

newman8r• 6 years ago

It might have been mostly priced in already - I was reading some articles about possible delistings last week, and I consider myself a hobbyist, not a serious investor.

gruez13• 6 years ago

Yeah if you check the price history there was a massive drop from ~0.55 USD/XRP to ~0.25 USD/XRP shortly after SEC filed lawsuit against ripple.

JumpCrisscross• 6 years ago

The real test will be how much further XRP drops (or doesn't) from here

Do we know who holds most XRP?

Naïvely, I would guess retail investors and the company. I am not convinced either will be convinced to abandon ship by anything short of a court order.

aazaa2• 6 years ago

Most sources put that at Ripple and/or its two top execs. They obtained these positions by virtue of the Ripple consensus protocol, which conjured the coins into being and granted the network creator (Ripple) sole ownership.

AFAICT, that's the crux of what SEC will be going after.

durpkingOP• 6 years ago

could we track circulating supply over time? they could just add more and keep the marketcap up as the price dips

gruez13• 6 years ago

But that chart's tracking the XRP/USD price, not the market cap.

TylerE• 6 years ago

About? On Nov 28th is was $0.61.

That's down over 50%.

Coinbase to Suspend Trading in XRP

Related Stories