Consensus: https://ripple.com/build/xrp-ledger-consensus-process/ there's still a consensus mechanism, it's just not incentivized. Moreover, Ripple will end up choosing who can be a validating node, but one imagines that it's going to allow many independent parties do it, just not anyone with a computer. I think the "no new coins" part isn't actually all that concerning. Basically someone who validates is eating costs to do so. But they will be benefiting in other ways presumably. Even Ripple probably will incentivize them by distributing their ninjamined stake accordingly.

For the purposes of large institutions that want to establish a trustless layer between them, this sounds like a reasonable model. But a cryptocurrency in the full 'decentralized' sense? Nah. (By the way, STEEM doesn't quite fit this bill either, but I love it anyway)

I actually hold some Ripple, and it's precisely because I am thinking that banks will end up jumping on board. Yes, Ripple has a lot of control now, but they have an incentive not to screw it up. They should dilute the validation, especially, to specific partners, and may end up in an acceptable level of decentralization (trustlessness, really).

In essence, when you invest in XRP, you are investing in Ripple and friends (despite them making the distinction that XRP is not Ripple).

I do wonder though, should I look into Stellar instead? ponders.