Ripple Engineer Reveals Why Codius Project Failed Years Ago

bitcoinistPubblicato 2026-03-10Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-10

Introduzione

A former Ripple senior engineer, Steven Zeiler, has reignited discussion by explaining why the Codius decentralized computing project failed. Zeiler argued that despite solid technology and vision, Codius lacked a native token to incentivize early adopters and bootstrap the network, unlike Ethereum which succeeded partly due to the ETH token. His comments drew pushback from XRP Ledger validator Vet, who contended that Codius was intentionally designed to be token-agnostic via the Interledger Protocol, without an ICO or insider advantages. Vet also disputed claims that Codius is dead, citing ongoing development efforts. The debate also touched on Ripple’s former CTO Joel Schwartz’s earlier signals about reviving Codius, though no recent updates have followed his departure from Ripple in 2025.

A former Ripple senior engineer, Steven Zeiler, has reignited a long-forgotten discussion in the XRP community by explaining why the once-promising Codius project quietly faded from view years ago. Zeiler argued that the project lacked a token, and without one, it failed to gain traction. His claim drew sharp debate from validators and caught the attention of many community members.

Why The Codius Project Failed

On March 8, Zeiler, who now serves as a developer evangelist at the Yellow Network, took to X to offer a frank reflection on why Codius, the decentralized computing platform, never gained the traction its creators expected. Zeiler and his team built Codius after leaving Ripple, and looking back, the former senior engineer noted that the project was missing a crucial piece that he believes doomed it from the start.

According to Zeiler, the technology behind Codius was solid, and the vision was clear. Still, the project lacked a native token to bootstrap the network or incentivize early adopters, the people who took the risk to deploy the software. He drew a direct comparison to the Ethereum blockchain, arguing that the “genius” of the ETH token gave people a tangible reason to get involved before the network proved itself.

Zeiler connected this lesson directly to the launch of the Yellow token, framing native assets as essential for rewarding the risk-takers who deploy software, contribute to code, and build early momentum. He noted that continually enabling self-executing applications that do not rely on third-party brokers increases the value of the underlying network. The former Ripple senior executive concluded his post with a pointed observation that every great technology needs powerful incentives to scale.

Community Pushes Back Against Zeiler

Vet, a dUNL validator for the XRP Ledger (XRPL), pushed back against Zeiler’s reasoning, arguing that the decision to create Codius without a native token was entirely intentional from the beginning. He noted that Codius was built to be token-agnostic via the Interledger Protocol, with no Initial Coin Offering (ICO) and no insider advantage, framing the absence of a native asset as a feature rather than a flaw.

A community member challenged Vet by pointing out that Codius is still dead regardless of the original intent, suggesting it may have needed an additional component to survive. The same member noted that as XRP surged from fractions of a cent to over $3, the project’s vision appeared to shift away from a ledger designed for all kinds of value toward one centered on XRP handling everything. In their view, the original vision was the stronger approach.

Vet disputed the characterization, maintaining that Codius is not dead. He referenced an Interledger Foundation podcast from two years ago that suggested the former Coil team had been redirected to work on Codius development. Vet also rejected the framing around XRP, insisting it was always purpose-built as a best-in-class settlement layer and there was never any pivot in its intended role.

Adding another layer to the story, a community member reminded others that Ripple’s former CTO, Joel Schwartz, had signaled back in 2023 that he was actively working to revive the Codius project, noting that recent technological advances had filled the gaps and addressed the challenges the project once faced. However, Schwartz stepped down as CTO at Ripple in September 2025, and no further updates on a potential Codius revival have emerged from his end.

Ripple price recovers from lows | Source: XRPUSDT on Tradingview.com

Domande pertinenti

QAccording to former Ripple engineer Steven Zeiler, what was the primary reason for the Codius project's failure?

AAccording to Steven Zeiler, the primary reason for the Codius project's failure was the lack of a native token to bootstrap the network and incentivize early adopters.

QWhat comparison did Zeiler make to support his argument about the importance of a native token?

AZeiler drew a direct comparison to the Ethereum blockchain, arguing that the 'genius' of the ETH token gave people a tangible reason to get involved before the network proved itself.

QHow did the validator Vet from the XRP Ledger (XRPL) counter Zeiler's explanation for Codius's failure?

AVet argued that the decision to create Codius without a native token was entirely intentional, as it was built to be token-agnostic via the Interledger Protocol, framing the absence of a native asset as a feature rather than a flaw.

QWhat did a community member suggest was a consequence of XRP's massive price surge on the Codius project's vision?

AA community member suggested that as XRP's price surged, the project's vision appeared to shift away from a ledger designed for all kinds of value toward one centered on XRP handling everything.

QWhat update regarding Codius was mentioned in relation to Ripple's former CTO, Joel Schwartz?

AA community member reminded others that Ripple's former CTO, Joel Schwartz, had signaled in 2023 that he was actively working to revive the Codius project, noting that recent technological advances had addressed its past challenges.

Letture associate

New Wall Street Play: Yen Shorts Still Adding, But Japan Stocks Don't Rely on Carry Trade Unwinding

On June 3rd, USD/JPY hit 160.44, its highest level since July 2024, while the Nikkei 225 surged past 68,000 points. Contrary to popular narratives of an imminent "carry trade unwind" akin to August 2024, data reveals a more complex picture. Speculative net short positions in yen futures have actually increased, reaching -114,667 contracts by late May, suggesting traders are doubling down rather than retreating. Meanwhile, Japan's Finance Ministry conducted its largest-ever single-round FX intervention (11.73 trillion yen) in April-May but failed to hold the 160 yen line. The Nikkei's rally is not driven by carry trade dynamics. Foreign investors are aggressively buying Japanese stocks, with net purchases in 2026 running nearly 16 times higher than 2025 levels. This inflow is concentrated in AI and semiconductor-related stocks like SoftBank and Socionext, fueled by positive sector outlooks, rather than being a flight from unwinding yen shorts. Furthermore, the Nikkei has continued climbing despite the Bank of Japan's (BOJ) rate hikes to 0.75%. This disconnect exists because the current equity boom is fueled by AI-driven foreign investment, not reliant on cheap yen funding. However, this relationship remains fragile. Should the BOJ hike rates further (e.g., to 1.0%) while dollar weakness increases carry trade costs, the trajectories of the yen and Japanese stocks could reconverge, potentially triggering volatility.

marsbit3 min fa

New Wall Street Play: Yen Shorts Still Adding, But Japan Stocks Don't Rely on Carry Trade Unwinding

marsbit3 min fa

Broadcom's Q3 Guidance Misses Expectations by $12 Billion, After-Hours Trading Plummets Over 13%, AI Narrative "Cooling"?

On June 3, Broadcom released record Q2 FY26 results with revenue of $22.19B, up 48% YoY, and AI chip sales of $10.8B, up 143%. Adjusted EPS of $2.44 beat estimates. However, its Q3 AI semiconductor revenue guidance of $16B, while up over 200% YoY, fell roughly $1.2B (7%) short of analyst consensus expectations of $17.2B. This miss, coupled with slightly weaker-than-expected software revenue, triggered a severe market reaction. CEO Hock Tan maintained the FY26 AI revenue outlook of over $100B but did not raise it, disappointing investors who had priced in more robust growth. The stock plummeted over 13% in after-hours trading, erasing roughly $270B in market cap. The sell-off extended to peers like Marvell. A key concern for markets, particularly for Chinese optical module suppliers, was Tan's comment that the contribution of AI networking (e.g., Ethernet switches, optical interconnect chips) to AI revenue, currently near 40%, is expected to normalize to around 30% over time, signaling a potential peak in growth for that segment. Despite the guidance shortfall, Tan reiterated that AI demand remains "insatiable" and reaffirmed the long-term target of exceeding $100B in AI revenue by FY27. The reaction highlights the heightened sensitivity and premium valuation placed on AI-exposed stocks, where anything less than stellar guidance can prompt significant profit-taking. The broader question is whether this represents a cooling AI narrative or a correction in overstretched valuations.

marsbit3 min fa

Broadcom's Q3 Guidance Misses Expectations by $12 Billion, After-Hours Trading Plummets Over 13%, AI Narrative "Cooling"?

marsbit3 min fa

Fei-Fei Li's Team Clarifies the Concept of 'World Models', Sora Merely a Renderer

"World Models" has become a widely used yet confusing term in AI. To address this, a team led by Fei-Fei Li and World Labs proposed a functional taxonomy based on the Partially Observable Markov Decision Process framework. This taxonomy categorizes systems called "world models" into three distinct projections: Renderers, Simulators, and Planners. Renderers, like OpenAI's Sora and other video generation models, focus on producing photorealistic visual outputs for human perception. They prioritize visual fidelity over physical accuracy. Simulators, such as NVIDIA Omniverse, aim to compute precise future environmental states for computational tasks like engineering analysis or digital twins. Planners, like Vision-Language-Action models, take in observations and goals to output executable actions for robots or agents. The article clarifies that most current "world models," including Sora, are primarily Renderers. They generate convincing visuals but lack the core ability to simulate state transitions based on actions, a key requirement for a true world model in classic reinforcement learning definitions. This conceptual confusion has practical implications, leading to potential misalignment in technology selection, investment, and public understanding of AI capabilities. Clear categorization is crucial. It helps enterprises avoid costly mistakes (e.g., using a renderer for robot training), allows investors to accurately assess markets, and enables researchers to build comparable benchmarks. While future systems may integrate these functions, recognizing current boundaries is essential for honest assessment and progress.

marsbit1 h fa

Fei-Fei Li's Team Clarifies the Concept of 'World Models', Sora Merely a Renderer

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片