The BIS just published a pretty interesting paper on putting official government data on a blockchain.Basically, they take things like GDP and inflation data, create cryptographic fingerprints of the data, combine them into a Merkle tree, and then record the final proof on the XRP Ledger.That gives you a permanent, timestamped way to verify:“Did this data actually come from the official source, and has anyone changed it?”They also use Verifiable Credentials to tie the data back to the official publisher. The proof of concept was extremely fast too, roughly 3–5 seconds to publish and 1–2 seconds to verify.They chose XRPL for the prototype because of its fast finality and low fees. BUT here’s the part XRP maxis seem to be missing:The BIS explicitly says the system is blockchain-agnostic. XRPL is the blockchain they used for the experiment. It doesn't mean XRPL is the required blockchain.And the paper actually discusses the 2025 US Department of Commerce + Chainlink work, where Chainlink was used to bring GDP, PCE and other official economic data on-chain.Basically there are two different layers:BIS/XRPL:Government data cryptographic proof blockchain verify authenticityChainlink:Official data Chainlink infrastructure reliably deliver it to blockchains/appsSo no, this paper doesn't prove that XRPL replaces Chainlink. If anything, it shows why these systems can be complementary. The bigger takeaway is that blockchain is becoming a verification/trust layer for official data. XRPL was simply the blockchain used in this particular BIS prototype.https://www.bis.org/publications/working-paper-1374-verifiable-official-statistics-blockchain-based-approach.pdf
>>62653432China would just read and steal it. Transparency is dying. More and more people and governments are working in the shadows.
>>62653432>XRPL was simply the blockchain used in this particular BIS prototype.Whatever makes you cope
>>62653827
>>62653432>BUT here’s the part XRP maxis seem to be missingIt's going to get progressively harder say this over time with a straight face.
>>62653927It's great they are being impartial and giving shitchains a chance.
>>62653432I'll be honest here. i don't care if it is XRP or LINK, but this sounds like a piece of shit when you compare it to the blockchain potential use cases that people talked about back in the day
>>62653977I’m still of the belief that dentistry will be brought on chain
>>62653977It will mostly come to fruition. But there has to be a baseline working model underlying it first. You want innocuous, but important things that can't spectactularly fail.
>>62653968What happens when they start testing more chains since this concept is agnostic. >>62653927
>>62654076Why would they choose XRP for the points they mentioned in testing, but then not choose it for those same points irl?I mean...The logic doesn't quite go on that one no matter how you try to look at it.
>>6265343290% of blockchain activity is driven by bots with no human input whatsoeverif the dead internet theory is real, crypto is also deadbots win again. you may now request a captcha *snickers*
>>62654086SHUT THE FUCK UPLINK IS THE CHOSEN ONENOT XRPSTOP TRYING TO DENY ITJUST BECAUSE THE XRPL IS THE ONLY DISTRIBUTED LEDGER THAT CAN HANDLE THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT XRP WILL BE USED FOR REALLINK IS GOING TO $10,000 SERGEY WILL WINLINK WILL MAKE ME A BILLIONAIRE
Wow dood this sounds amazing, now we can verify that the door dash cheeseburger wage graph really IS reporting the correct cheeseburgers per hour Donald Trump has saved america. Thanks XRP!
>>62654086They didn’t choose XRP, the concept is chain agnostic. For all we know, ripple probably paid them.
The document itself explicitly compares both systems. XRPL is API based and has low integration complexity/transaction fees whereas Chainlink is Medium complexity
>>62653432They can use XRPL without having to buy XRP.Fucking XRP BAGGIES KEK
>>62654086XRP is fast because it's not secure which makes it good for testing. It's just a small group cooperating instead of an actual global decentralized blockchain.
>>62654162Yea, that's better. topkek at you retards.I was very early into BTC. It's all lies and faggots and it glows harder than anything.Since then, I'm in actual business. XRP is the solution and it's over basically.Now...there are edgelord options, but it's not really serious or business related.
>>62654216The only thing crypto offers is the thing XRP doesn't. Just use a database.
>>62654259See. I can tell you aren't in business.That's why I said "since then I'm in business."I still run warehouse and inventory on an Access db. The simplest is the best.What's happening is a Google Sheets that everyone on the planet shares. And it's going to be bigly.
>>62654216>>62654265lol you aren't in any real business you xrp fag
>>62654328No I have thirteen employees and run an ecommerce business with about 30,000 sqft of warehouse space.I'm just telling you and the other dude something.
>>62654265You're an idiot, too stupid to even pretend you're engaging with the conversation.Yes, databases are useful, like I just said. XRP does nothing, as a database it's just shitty and it has nothing to do with crypto.
>we take advantage of the retards every step of the way>if you use our blockchain you can take advantage of these retards toowhy are linkies like this?
>>62654337no you don't
>>62653432Can xrp and link finally become brothers?
>>62654144>https://www.bis.org/publications/working-paper-1374-verifiable-official-statistics-blockchain-based-approach.pdfLmao, as a researcher myself, I was looking at this table "Well this is weird, why the fuck are they hardcore pitching the first solution ("SDMx semantics") over the other ones?". Cause if you look at it, it just OBLITERATES every other comparison in EACH AND EVERY metric.Stuff like this doesn't happen in the real world - there's always a catch/trade-off. And in an academic paper, the whole point is to show these trade-offs. So why are those researchers hardcore being biased towards their first approach?>The primary contribution of this paper is a production-oriented, SDMx-native mechanism for cryptographically binding published official statistics to their source, enabling independent verification without altering existing dissemination workflows"Ah ok. Into the trash it goes.
>>62654751The more I read about this garbage piece, the more infuriating it gets. > The numbers were obtained on a single-host XRPL DevNet deployment with synthetic SDMx corpora; they characterise the prototype’s efficiency, not a fully hardened production deployment."Lets compare our prototype to production-grade solutions" :clownface:>Chainlink and Ethereum offer only limited real-time capabilities owing to longer block times (minutes for Ethereum) and oracle reporting intervals (often hours for Chainlink data feeds)Outright liesRest of the paper just continues like this garbage.The BIS should be ashamed publicizing this in their name. Grifting, intellectually dishonest low IQ specimen. But what do you expect from people working at d-fine?
>>62654132>ripple probably paid themBehold, the mental gymnastics. This retard is arguing ripple is bribing the bank of banks, the entity that writes the global banking standards.You fuddies are in a league of its own.
>>62653432>then record the final proof on the XRP Ledger.Or on literally any of the hundreds of public and private chains that exist.
>>62653432>>62655073
>>62654761Wow…not a good look for blockchains like link and eth…this article shits all over them
>>62655074The xrpl IS blockchain agnostic tho…that’s why xrp will be the base layer of the “finternet of crypto” and everything will run on top for whatever niche crap you or a sovereign nation wants to doChris Larson is all about being the enterprise layer, not the product layer
>>62655084>The xrpl IS blockchain agnostic thoThe paper explicitly says it is not."We used XRPL for this PoC, but the aim is to be blockchain agnostic".This directly says XRPL is just one of the hundreds or thousands of blockchains they want to use.
>>62655088You’re reading it wrong, “it may sound like we are not agnostic by choosing this one chain but in fact we chose it because it fits our goal of being agnostic because it is agnostic, unlike all the other ones that chose to be greedy (so we didn’t use those), but the greedy shitty ones can still be used (if you want to be gay and use something inferior) through the xrpl because it’s agnostic”
>>62654384Yes, I do. I'm up having coffee now after going to bed early and rising early like an actual business person.We'll see when Mr. Neet responds.
>>62654384>cryptoNo one cares though. Businesses want efficient payments and a ledger they can use WITHOUT consulting some huge faggots in a skyscraper in NYC.
>>62655100They literally say "we use XRPL for this PoC, but we are going to be blockchain agnostic and use solutions other than XRPL as well".Get your head out your ass.
>>62655119Ok if that’s what makes you feel better
>>62655125That's literally what they're saying.
>>62655119kek"They" say a lot of things anon. Papers like this are meant to pretty strongly indicate, while never saying, and staying "legal".Government contracts are also open to anyone officially. I'm yet to ever get one. But, I know, and I am thankful for, officially and technically being allowed.
>>62655132big fat cope
>>62655136Meh. You are quite new if you don't agree with my statement. Recall "they" all claimed this was a security for years as well."You" told me it was as well because "they" said it.In that instance I was correct of course and you were wrong. We'll just wait and you can check back in later.
>>62655142Ripple was literally ordered to pay a fine for having sold unregistered securities.
>>62655155Because there was a contract.The oranges weren't securities anon. The orange CONTRACTS were securities.We went through this with you years ago like I said and I was correct the entire time and you are still grasping at straws when it's been entirely resolved.Now Rippple has to sell them on the market which is also good as they were selling future options and selling under market price to make deals. This was also the perfect resolution.The people seething the most are the ones that insist, beyond all real life reality, that Ripple IS XRP. When in fact Ripple is not the oranges, it's not the ledger, and it's not the XRP.
>>62655160What the fuck is wrong with you.
>>62655166Probably quite a few things people could point to.But I see you haven't pointed to my post as being one of them.
>>62655181Ripple's sales of XRP were securities just as much as the very precedent that created the fucking Howey test to begin with.You admitted as much yourself when you said Howey's oranges weren't securities.And this has nothing to do with the fact that BIS only used XRPL for this specific proof of concept, and they explicitly want to be blockchain agnostic.
>>62655195>this has nothing to do with the fact that BIS only used XRPLExactly.It begs the question of why you brought up Ripple in the first place.My guess is that you were seething for the last week to seven years and they were top of mind.I'd suggest separating the two in your thinking.
>>62655223>It begs the question of why you brought up Ripple in the first place.You're the one who brought up the securities argument (and some weird personal drama) to deflect from the fact that XRPL is just one of hundreds or thousands of chains BIS wants to use.
>>62655233Read again. I never mentioned Ripple.The article is about the XRPL. My discussion is about the XRPL.You've started seething about an unrelated corporation. I've then explained it so that you don't have to seethe so hard, but you are stupid I think.I didn't even bring up Ripple when talking about the securities. I was referring to the actual token (oranges). You then immediately started seething about Ripple.Who, again, is unrelated.
>>62655255>I never mentioned Ripple.You brought up the securities argument out of literally nowhere. That's Ripple.
>>62653827>>62653968This is true, there's data on this report for the speed of use of a number of different fin techs.XRPL was the fastest. Eth was also tested and turned out to be slow and expensive.
>>62653432>>62653927>>62654132Anon thanks for posting details. Ripple is one of the few APPROVED by BIS and Euro Central bank. The word on the steet is that there are a number of other banks testing private copies of Ripple/ XRPL . >obviously under a different name
>>62653973>shitchains>FED testing XRP>BIS and Euro central bank test it>major banks test it .>Blackrock claims XPR ETF is coming
>>62655116>>62654337>Businesses want efficient payments and a ledger they can use WITHOUT consulting some huge faggots in a skyscraper in NYC.I agree , this is correct. Also since you run ecommerce. You probably have a website, and probably know that current credit card model FAILED, and you should know why . There are databases of stolen credit card numbers and addresses in Africa, India and Russia. So it is hard to tell if a person ordering online on your website is a real person, or someone using a VPN and a stolen credit card # and fake address. That problem is solved via a blockchein >(user may be authenticated via a blockchain , and you'll know it's a real person and not some hacker), or a crypto currency> (crypto currency payment is final).
>>62655260>>62655260Same guy now in my corner office.I brought up that you were the "same guy" that told me XRP would be a security.That's not the same as bringing up securities...unless...are you a woman?Your reading comprehension is likely the reason you aren't into astro bag territory of XRP by now and hold what? Chainlink?
>>62655401>You probably have a website, and probably know that current credit card model FAILED, and you should know whyBIGLY. I'm getting raked on the fees. When the economy was good businesses were looking the other way. Within the last 5 years every wholesale payment from every company has gone to ACH or literally a check in the mail the fees and associated bullshit are so high.I'm building for the long term future, but the SECOND my fees drop 2%, with my revenues, my take home income will triple because the cost is already there and I'm profitable.But 3% on EVERYTHING is a lot of money.
>>62655451Yes, you brought up two completely irrelevant things (some personal bs and the securities thing) to deflect from the fact that BIS only used XRPL as an example and wants to be blockchain agnostic.
>>62655401Not to mention the cc companies use the "points" system to encourage shopping at their preferred locations which is also a harm to me given that it incentives normies to shop at globocorp.The BUSINESS demand is enormous right now. It will be sated. Probably have to wait til 2030 roundabouts.
>>62655468No. I was telling you, that you sound exactly like the last people that were dead wrong.Take it or leave it. I can predict what you'll do and it makes it funny to me actually because, you know, horse to water and all that.
>>62655481>I didn't "bring up" two irrelevant things, I "told you" two irrelevant things
>>62654761>>Chainlink and Ethereum offer only limited real-time capabilities owing to longer block times (minutes for Ethereum) and oracle reporting intervals (often hours for Chainlink data feeds).Lmao when actual intelligent people review existing tech they have to take pause at how god awful LINK and ETH are? Now that the dust has settled we can finally use actually useful technology (not LINK or ETH). Crypto is healing.
>>62655515>oracle reporting intervalsLOL!OHNONNONONONNONO
