Andrew Baxter-Smith

[CoinSpot @coinspot]

Crypto 101: Do I need to buy a whole Bitcoin? 🍰

Bitcoin is divisible into 100 million smaller units called 'satoshis', meaning you can purchase a fraction of a Bitcoin rather than the entire coin.

Whether it’s $1, $10, or another amount that suits you, the ability to buy smaller portions has helped make Bitcoin more accessible to a wider range of people.

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@MoonLamboio WTF?!

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@thinkingcrypto I just can't figure out how so many top analysists, let alone us plebs got it so wrong! Fundamentals are the best we've ever seen in the 8 yrs I've been in the space. There has to be something fishy going on.....

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@ZachRector7 I like your idea, but who pays it?

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@Cobb_XRPL I think we're fucked bro... 6 months ago we weren't going under $2 and here we are at $1.50. I love XRP and all it stands for, but fuck man this is getting hard

[Cointelegraph @Cointelegraph]

🇺🇸 BREAKING: The House has voted 217-212 to advance the rule setting up floor votes on crypto legislation after nearly 10 hours of delay, paving the way for final passage votes on major digital asset bills.

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@TheCryptoLark As soon as you think you have the market all figured out....then you don't!

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@coinspot poor

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@iamerniepalomo @elonmusk @xai @X XLM???

[🌸Eri ~ Carpe Diem @sentosumosaba]

If you're new to blockchain or have been around a while, the Internet of Value remains the aspiration for a more open, inclusive, and efficient global financial system.
✨Hats off to everyone building a better "money" part.

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@kucoincom Permissionless Maximalist!!

Are you not entertained?!

🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Wietse Wind - 🪝☝️🛠 Xaman® + XRPL + Xahau @WietseWind]

Another chapter on our journey to trying to get @XRPLLabs and @XamanWallet to break even...

I have to admit: it's quite the search.

🧵 Long read, but worth the read. Please read.

Here's what we know:

- We want to build @XamanWallet for you, the most secure, consistent, feature complete XRP Ledger & Xahau wallet
- It can't be a "hobby project": with 4bn USD (!) of value to keep safe in self custody, stakes are high!
- We can't live from grants forever: grants run out, don't come around anymore, etc.
- We would like everyone who benefits from what we build to chime in to keep us around, building Xaman and other XRPL and Xahau things.

Here's what we don't know (at least: not for certain, yet)

- How to monetise in the most fair way
- How to keep everyone happy on this monetisation journey

We sell Pro, sell Tangem cards, and that helps, but that's not enough (not by far) to feed our families and servers on.

Recently, we introduced monthly in-app monetisation (Apple / Google payments) for users who exceeded overall user base average use on a 30 day basis. A lot of people respected this, but we got many suggestions / complaints about the fact that payment wasn't in XRP, and the height of the monthly payment wasn't being experienced as fair.

So here we go, in an attempt (I think this may be it, I hope this is it!) to get it right.

We are 'wrapping' the transactions in a "service fee". There's the XRPL fee and the Xaman service fee.

This is completely normal in every other ecosystem by the way. Most other chains & other clients have fees like this. Less visible though, because they hide them in already high on ledger fees and swaps.

We go the transparent route. Whenever you sign a transaction, the fee will be made up of the "On ledger fee" and the "Service fee". A breakdown can be displayed.

Users with Pro, or still in their monthly in-app monetisation cycle will not pay.

Certain transaction types like Payments do not have a service fee.

Others have a small fixed fee, or if it's DEX trading: a small percentage (again: as all other wallets do in other ecosystems).

This is where we get to see, as an ecosystem, if the XRP Ledger ecosystem can move forward with a mindset of sustainability. I have faith we will ;)

TL;DR:
- No more in app paywall
- Small XRP based fee on certain transactions
- Existing Pro all you can eat till Feb 1 next year
- New Pro subs: free # tx and volume tier
- Still within paid 30 days? Still good

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@alex08260826 @XRPLWin @ainittomai A bit off topic, but a great version of one of the first hooks in history by Johann Pachelbel’s Canon in D. Hooks go way back man!
https://t.co/pqP5o5abFY

[Matthew, MBA @bit_finance_]

ICYMI, #Ripple just acquired NY & TX Money Transmitter Licenses.

But that's not the biggest news - the real story is what this means for #XRP and what's happening behind the scenes...👇
🧵

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@X__Anderson I thought the same damn thing🤯🤯

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

FACTS

[David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz @JoelKatz]

For about the 400th time, for anyone who doesn't understand what validators do:

XRPL actually has a consensus algorithm that actually reaches an agreed consensus. About every five seconds, every node participates in a process to decide how to resolve the double spend problem for XRPL transactions.

Honest participants should have no reason to care how this is resolved because honest participants don't double spend. But everyone does need some resolution because without a way to solve the double spend problem, disagreement over who holds what would eventually destroy the system. This is precisely why bitcoin needs proof of work -- to ensure eventual agreement over which of a set of conflicting transactions to rely on.

XRPL validators are not paid and cannot censor valid transactions. The only threat is if many validators conspire to fail to reach agreement, breaking the ledger. To protect against this threat, each node decides which other nodes it will try to solve the double spend problem with.

The consensus algorithm has two results for any given transaction, "yes, we will include this transaction in this ledger if it valid" and "no, we will include this transaction in the next ledger if it is valid". There is no way for an honest node to agree not to execute a valid transaction. Why would any honest node ever agree not to execute a valid transaction? Recovery for valid transactions that are do not get "yes" votes is deterministic.

This cheaper, faster, and more censorship resistant than PoW. But it does have two disadvantages:

1. Because it is not adversarial and is based on the idea that all honest participants are aligned in wanting to execute only valid transactions with maximal forward progress, it cannot be used to do the initial distribution of a token.

2. It does benefit from as much agreement as possible on who will participate actively in the double spend resolution process.

The logic of the UNL is that good validators will accumulate and bad validators will rapidly get excluded. Validators aren't compensated, so there's nothing to fight over.

Validators and consensus are not the XRPL's governance mechanism. The XRPL's governance mechanism is the rules enforced by the nodes participants run.

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@justinsuntron Check sources...

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@BCBacker The cope is real, clowns🤡😂🤣
https://t.co/HP06Q2pzHs

[Bitcoin News @BitcoinNewsCom]

Jack Mallers: “I can confirm Ripple is spending millions of dollars to undermine a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve in America.”

[Andrew Baxter-Smith @AndrewBaxterSm1]

@WietseWind @RichardXRPL That's power!!!

[Digital Euro Association @DigiEuro]

📢#Crypto giant DEA member @Ripple plans to ‘imminently’ debut its #stablecoin on major exchanges. Check it out!
https://t.co/GHI784dE7Q