- Ripple CTO David Schwartz engaged in a debate over XRP’s legitimacy.
- Critics claim XRP is centralized and manipulated by Ripple.
- Schwartz challenges critics to discuss XRP’s technology, but they refuse.
Ripple CTO David Schwartz defended XRP in a heated online debate after investor Jonnie King called the asset a “vaporware ponzi.” The discussion stemmed from concerns over the inclusion of XRP in the U.S potential strategic reserves.
King argued that XRP is under centralized control and that Ripple’s influence over supply made it unfit for the U.S. strategic reserve. He accused Ripple of controlling half the XRP supply through its escrow system and releasing large token amounts monthly, which he claimed let the company manipulate price and make revenue.
He also alleged that Ripple could alter the release schedule of escrowed tokens at any time, giving it undue influence over market dynamics.
Beyond market worries, King pointed to Ripple’s political involvement. He cited that Ripple’s executive Chairman, Chris Larsen, donated to Kamala Harris’s campaign. Meanwhile, following Donald Trump’s victory, the company itself contributed to Trump’s inauguration.
Ripple CTO Reacts
Schwartz responded by challenging King to discuss XRP’s actual technology rather than its market mechanics or corporate governance. He asked King to highlight any aspect of XRPL that he found interesting, steering the conversation away from the popular FUD narrative about XRP.
However, King dismissed the request, arguing that XRP’s technology was irrelevant if Ripple maintained control over the asset. He repeated his statements about pre-mined tokens, missing ledger entries, and a lack of smart contract capabilities, calling XRPL “a highly centralized ledger with missing entries.”
Related: Ripple CEO Backs Trump’s XRP Inclusion in US Crypto Reserve, Calls for Industry Unity
Schwartz countered by questioning whether King understood XRPL’s consensus model, decentralized exchange (DEX), and how it prevents network reorganizations. He pointed out contradictions in King’s arguments, noting that XRP was labeled “vaporware” and “outdated tech from 2012” in the same discussion.
Centralization vs. Decentralization
King insisted that XRP’s design made it inferior to Bitcoin. He claimed that its consensus mechanism was based on centralized trust and could be compromised if bad actors colluded within the Unique Node List (UNL).
He contrasted this with Bitcoin’s proof-of-work model, which allows anyone to become a validator. Schwartz pushed back, emphasizing that XRPL’s features, such as its DEX and non-native asset support, provided functionality that other blockchains lacked. However, King dismissed the XRPL DEX as “trust-based” and lacking programmability.
No matter how much Schwartz tried to shift the focus to XRPL’s tech, King held firm that governance and control problems were more important than any tech XRP might offer.
Related: Ripple CTO David Schwartz on XRPL: KYC Tussle and Decentralization
The debate shows the gap between XRP supporters and critics, including Bitcoin enthusiasts. While XRP fans believe the token deserves inclusion in the U.S. strategic reserve, Bitcoin purists(maxis) believe only BTC qualifies for such an initiative.
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.
