Where Did XRP Come From? Former Ripple Exec Drops Bombshell Story

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-01-31Actualizado a 2026-01-31

Resumen

Former Ripple executive David Schwartz recently participated in a public Q&A on X, revealing key historical insights about XRP and Ripple company origins. He attributed the term "drop" for XRP's smallest unit to Arthur Britto, a primary architect of the XRP Ledger, whom he praised for possessing rare and exceptional intelligence. Schwartz clarified that Ripple’s name and its association with the Grateful Dead song were coincidental, stemming from the acquisition of the ripple.com domain from a fan. He highlighted Britto’s foundational contributions, including the built-in decentralized exchange and pathfinding for multi-source payments on the XRP Ledger. When pressed about XRP’s price potential, Schwartz declined to dismiss the possibility of high values like $50 or $100, recalling his past underestimation of crypto price surges.

An interactive question-and-answer session between members of the community and David Schwartz has peeled back another layer of early XRP and Ripple history.

The discussion unfolded publicly on the social media platform X, where users posed a series of questions touching on the token’s smallest unit, the creative forces behind the XRP Ledger, and even some forgotten cultural details from Ripple’s early internet presence. The responses from Schwartz offered rare insights into the personalities and ideas that shaped Ripple and the Ledger in its formative years.

Ripple Name, Drop, And The Role Of Arthur Britto

The exchange began when an XRP community member known as Bird asked Schwartz who came up with the term “drop” as the name for the smallest unit of the altcoin. The question was for clarifying historical details for documentation purposes. Schwartz replied that he could not say with absolute certainty, but he believed the idea came from Arthur Britto, one of the primary architects of the XRP Ledger.

Schwartz then expanded beyond the naming question and offered a personal comparison between himself and Britto. He described himself as having the same kind of intelligence as most people, just more of it, but said Britto possessed something entirely different, a rare quality that others simply do not have.

Another community member, Toby, switched the conversation from technical history to cultural curiosity. He asked whether Ripple’s name, which also happens to be a Grateful Dead song, and the appearance of a Dancing Bear on an old Ripple 404 error page were part of some deeper internal joke or inspiration.

According to Schwartz, the only connection he was aware of was purely incidental. The ripple.com domain had been registered by a Grateful Dead fan who secured it because of the song, and Ripple later acquired the domain from that individual.

Reality Check On XRP Price Expectations

As the conversation continued, XRPL validator Vet asked Schwartz to provide a concrete example from the past that demonstrated the special quality he had attributed to Britto. Schwartz responded by pointing to two major ideas that originated with Britto: the concept of a decentralized exchange built directly into the XRP Ledger and the use of pathfinding to allow payments to draw incrementally from multiple liquidity sources.

The tone of the discussion changed again when another user urged Schwartz to publicly tell XRP supporters that the price could never reach figures like $50 or $100. However, Schwartz declined to make such a statement.

He explained that although he personally does not think such price levels are likely, history has taught him caution when declaring what crypto prices cannot do. He recalled thinking XRP was unlikely to reach $0.25 and selling his holdings at $0.10 because it felt irrationally high at the time. This was at a time when Bitcoin reaching $100 seemed impossible.

XRP trading at $1.74 on the 1D chart | Source: XRPUSDT on Tradingview.com

Preguntas relacionadas

QWho did David Schwartz credit with coming up with the term 'drop' for the smallest unit of XRP?

ADavid Schwartz believed the idea came from Arthur Britto, one of the primary architects of the XRP Ledger.

QWhat was the connection between Ripple's name and the Grateful Dead song, according to Schwartz?

AThe ripple.com domain was registered by a Grateful Dead fan because of the song, and Ripple later acquired the domain from that individual. The only connection was purely incidental.

QWhat two major ideas did Schwartz attribute to Arthur Britto's unique insight?

AThe concept of a decentralized exchange built directly into the XRP Ledger and the use of pathfinding to allow payments to draw from multiple liquidity sources.

QWhy did David Schwartz decline to state that XRP could never reach prices like $50 or $100?

AHe explained that although he personally does not think such price levels are likely, history has taught him caution when declaring what crypto prices cannot do, citing his past miscalculations with the price of XRP and Bitcoin.

QWhat personal comparison did Schwartz make between himself and Arthur Britto?

ASchwartz described himself as having the same kind of intelligence as most people, just more of it, but said Britto possessed something entirely different, a rare quality that others simply do not have.

Lecturas Relacionadas

U.S. Government Bans Foreign Nationals from Using Fable 5, Anthropic Issues Rebuttal

U.S. Government Bans Foreign Access to Fable 5, Anthropic Issues Rebuttal On June 12th, the U.S. government ordered AI company Anthropic to immediately suspend all foreign access—including foreign nationals within the U.S. and Anthropic's own foreign employees—to its newly released Fable 5 and Mythos 5 AI models, citing national security concerns. This forced Anthropic to temporarily disable access to both models for all users globally, as it cannot technically differentiate user nationality at scale. The models, released just three days prior, represent Anthropic's highest public capability tier. Fable 5 is the first publicly available model from the advanced "Mythos" family, while Mythos 5 is a less-restricted version for approved cybersecurity and critical infrastructure partners. The government's directive was reportedly triggered by claims from another company that it could "jailbreak" Mythos 5, raising alarm within the Trump administration. Anthropic, in a detailed public statement, strongly challenged this rationale. The company argues the demonstrated "jailbreak" is a narrow, non-generalized technique that merely involves identifying minor, known software vulnerabilities—a capability common to other publicly available models like OpenAI's GPT-5.5 and routinely used by cybersecurity defenders. Anthropic stated it has complied with the order but disagrees with the government's standard, warning that applying it industry-wide would halt all new frontier model deployments. The company criticized the lack of a transparent, fact-based legal process and expressed confidence the situation stems from a misunderstanding. It is working to restore access and will release more technical details within 24 hours. Other Anthropic models remain unaffected.

链捕手Hace 14 min(s)

U.S. Government Bans Foreign Nationals from Using Fable 5, Anthropic Issues Rebuttal

链捕手Hace 14 min(s)

The Revelation from the Raydium Theft Incident: New DeFi Vulnerabilities Lurking in Forgotten Old Contracts

**Raydium Exploit Reveals DeFi's Hidden Risk: Forgotten "Zombie" Contracts** A recent attack on Raydium's deprecated V3 AMM pools resulted in a loss of approximately $1.34 million. The hacker exploited pools that were no longer supported by Raydium's current UI or SDK but remained fully functional and accessible on-chain. This incident highlights a critical, often overlooked category of risk in DeFi: inactive or legacy smart contracts that projects fail to properly decommission. Since March 2025, there have been at least 8 publicly reported attacks targeting such abandoned contracts, with total losses around $10.8 million. Including older pools and deprecated features, the count rises to 10 incidents with roughly $22.5 million in losses. These "zombie contracts" represent a lifecycle management failure rather than a code vulnerability, yet they are typically misclassified under general "code bug" categories in security reports, masking the true scale of the problem. The root cause is that projects often merely document a contract as "deprecated" without taking essential technical steps to secure it: withdrawing remaining assets, disabling external call functions, and implementing ongoing monitoring. These forgotten, under-monitored components become prime targets for attackers. To address this, the industry needs to recognize "zombie contracts" as a distinct risk category and establish standardized decommissioning protocols. Essential steps should include: 1) a formal retirement announcement, 2) removal of all front-end integrations, 3) withdrawal of locked assets, 4) disabling key contract functions, 5) ongoing security monitoring, 6) clear user communication, and 7) a post-mortem analysis. The value of a DeFi project lies not only in its current TVL but also in the security of its historical codebase, which has now become a new attack surface.

Foresight NewsHace 2 hora(s)

The Revelation from the Raydium Theft Incident: New DeFi Vulnerabilities Lurking in Forgotten Old Contracts

Foresight NewsHace 2 hora(s)

Robots Begin to 'Consume Data': The Hidden Production Chain from Indian Data Factories to Billion-Dollar Humanoid Robots

Robots have started to 'consume data,' driving the formation of a new industrial supply chain focused on producing training data for embodied AI. Unlike large language models, which are trained on vast internet text corpora, embodied AI models face a 'data desert' in the physical world. This has created a massive demand for first-person perspective video data (Ego Data), captured by workers wearing cameras in places like Indian garment factories. Companies like Neocambrian AI are establishing 'data factories' where workers perform standardized tasks (e.g., sorting clothes, kitchen organization) to generate thousands of hours of video. Research, such as NVIDIA's EgoScale, demonstrates that scaling this human demonstration data predictably improves robot performance, particularly for dexterous manipulation. This has validated a training path combining large-scale human data for pre-training with smaller amounts of robot-specific data for fine-tuning. The value of different data types varies significantly, forming a 'data pyramid.' The base consists of low-cost, large-scale internet and Ego Data. Higher layers include more expensive motion-capture data (e.g., from data gloves), simulation/synthetic data, and the most costly and scarce layer: real robot teleoperation data. This demand has spawned a layered ecosystem of data suppliers: low-cost data factories, motion capture and alignment specialists, robot-native teleoperation service providers, simulation data companies, and platforms aiming for data standardization. Robot companies themselves are adopting a 'layered procurement' strategy: outsourcing generic Ego Data while building in-house capabilities for robot-specific adaptation data and the critical deployment/failure data generated in real-world applications. The industry is shifting focus from hardware and basic mobility to the data pipelines required for general-purpose capability. While parallels exist to data labeling companies like Scale AI in the LLM boom, the physical complexity of robot data—involving action success ambiguity and sim-to-real gaps—requires more integrated solutions for data collection, annotation, and a continuous feedback loop. The race is on to build the data engines that will teach robots to operate reliably in the unstructured real world.

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

Robots Begin to 'Consume Data': The Hidden Production Chain from Indian Data Factories to Billion-Dollar Humanoid Robots

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片