CTO
CTO Realty Growth, Inc.
stock NYSE

>\\\*\\\*Consider what we know:\\\*\\\*
Ok I’ll expect credible sources then.
>1. How it’s used to conduct cross-border payments
Plenty of info direct from Ripple on this.
>2. Ripple owns the majority of shares, primarily (IMO) so they can control the price
Coins, not shares. XRP is not a share of stock of Ripple, Ripple did not issue XRP, XRP ownership does not transfer to Ripple ownership. How would owning a majority of coins control price? Look at the daily, weekly and monthly trading volume and explain what price control Ripple’s monthly escrow or other OTC sales could possibly happen. The math doesn’t math. Ask your favorite AI agent to do the math for you.
>3. The goal is worldwide adoption/to replace SWIFT
Credible source on this? Ripple has stated that they expect to take some marketshare from Swift due to the nature of the technology and banks wanting to have faster cheaper payments without holding nostro vostro accounts, but nowhere have I ever read that the software RipplePayment’s was intended to replace swift. Swift is a secure messaging platform, Swift does not move value, RipplePayments moves value, it is also a secure messaging platform.
>How will smaller and mid-size banks adopt the technology if they can’t afford to buy the large amount of xrp needed in their reserve to conduct transactions?
They don’t need to hold XRP in reserve, RipplePayment’s is a software suite and when ODL (on demand liquidity) is used no nostro / vostro accounts are needed.
>XRP is intended to represent an amount, the amount of money being sent, as I understand it. It would be stupid if it was worth $50 where the dollar is worth $1, right?
No. This post is from David Schwartz.
>It can’t be dirt cheap. That doesn’t make any sense. If XRP costs $1, they’d need a million XRP which would cost $1 million. If XRP cost a million dollars, they’d need one XRP which would, again, cost $1 million.
>Except that higher prices make payments cheaper. Right now, you can buy a million dollar house with bitcoins. When bitcoins where $300, it would move the market too much and be too expensive to be practical. So higher prices make payments cheaper. ~ David Schwartz recently retired CTO of Ripple and co-creator of the XRPL and XRP ~ https://x.com/joelkatz/status/932748963526066178?s=61
Slippage is real, and why moving the market makes payments more expensive, in order to not do that a higher value coin helps with keeping payments cheaper.
>Does ripple control the price because THEY HAVE TO in order to KEEP IT LOW to operate as intended?
Ripple does not control the price. Let’s use critical thinking here. If this was the case, wouldn’t that have been discovered during the 5 years that the SEC had full access to every financial document Ripple had? Wouldn’t that have been a ‘gotcha’ for the SEC? No, and they know what you don’t, Ripple does not control the price, has no means to control the price, and there is no evidence they have controlled the price.
>Is xrp essentially a “hybrid” version of a stable coin (I know it’s not one technically). But it just seems like it has to remain stable or it can’t function as it’s intended.
Your logic used here is false, it may ‘seem’ this way to you, but I don’t know where you derive your assumptions from, but from what I have read from you i’d say you need to get info from the source and not 3rd party. XRP is a country neutral crypto currency that has no central authority, stable coins are issued by companies and under regulation by the jurisdictions they are used in.
>CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME IM AN IDIOT AND EXPLAIN WHAT IM MISSING?
Not an idiot, but you don’t know what you don’t know. Same for everyone until due diligence is done and even then there is always more to discover about what you don’t know and learn.

I'll try to find the interview I saw with the Waymo CTO. He mentioned how much their software development efficiency has improved since they've moved more of their code to the end-to-end model. It make sense after all since Google pretty much invented the technology which allows end-to-end AI. Everyone in the software industry is moving this direction since it saves so much effort. It's not a bad thing at all. As a software developer I'm having a hard time parsing why someone would be against this approach? Is there a downside that I'm missing?

SBC Medical Appoints Sheng-FU Hsiao as CTO Leveraging Medical Big Data from 283 Global Locations and 6.63 Million Annual Patient Visits to Build a Scalable, AI-Driven Medical Management Infrastructure - SBC SBCWW

tldr; David Schwartz, former Ripple CTO, revealed he sold 40,000 ETH at $1.05, believing he was a savvy investor. At the time, Ethereum was in its early stages, and selling for small gains seemed logical due to limited liquidity and infrastructure. However, ETH's value later surged, with Schwartz's sold ETH potentially worth over $160 million at its peak. This highlights the challenges of predicting long-term potential in emerging technologies like Ethereum. ETH currently trades above $2,000, showing signs of recovery.
*This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.