- Ripple CTO David Schwartz said that XRPL remains decentralized as its node software is open-source.
- XRPL’s consensus mechanism prevents validator collusion by allowing node operators to choose their validators.
- XRPL’s 80% supermajority threshold and preferred ledger logic protect against chain reorganizations.
With the crypto market going through substantial price drops, Ripple CTO David Schwartz joined a discussion with crypto journalist MetaMan on X (formerly Twitter) to address the effect of KYC enforcement on node operations in blockchain networks, especially within the XRP Ledger (XRPL.
MetaMan asked a fundamental question: “If you have to KYC to run a Blockchain node, is that really decentralization?”
Schwartz replied by asking how such a KYC mandate would be enforced. If it came with a legal license for the node software, it would impose centralization. However, if participants apply the rules in a decentralized way, the outcome might need closer thought
Bitcoin SV vs. XRPL
Speaking about Bitcoin SV (BSV), Schwartz noted that “a specific organization” holds a legal claim over the software, restricting who can use it and who can join the network.
In contrast, XRPL node software is open-source and not legally owned by any single entity. This makes XRPL more decentralized than BSV, since its governance system lets participants fork the network if they disagree with the rules.
Related: XRP Price Check Feb 25: Ripple SEC Case & ETF Impact on Price — Where’s XRP Headed?
Governance and Validator Influence on XRPL
Schwartz stressed that XRPL’s governance is consensus-based. If disputes arise, stakeholders must decide whether to accept the network’s existing rules or fork the network to create their own. Unlike Proof-of-Work (PoW) or Proof-of-Stake (PoS) systems, XRPL has no economic incentives for security, which makes forking simpler.
MetaMan voiced concerns over validator influence, particularly how a small group of trusted validators might be swayed to vote a certain way.
Schwartz countered that a node only follows what its code permits, so validators cannot impose rules unless node operators choose to comply.
Consensus Mechanics and Security
Vet, an XRPL dUNL operator, raised questions about XRPL’s defense against chain reorganization—a problem faced by Bitcoin and Ethereum. Schwartz explained that XRPL’s consensus relies on an 80% supermajority threshold, offering strong safeguards against unconfirmed transactions and reorganizations. This design keeps ledger validation secure and helps the network move forward.
Schwartz acknowledged a trade-off: in cases where forward progress might be risky, XRPL’s consensus algorithm is built to halt rather than risk serious issues.
Related: Ripple CTO Debunks XRP vs Bitcoin Supply Debate: Calls Out Misleading Comparisons
This commitment to safety remains essential, given the large amounts of value transacted on XRPL.
Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.
