Ripple Exec Clears The Air On Blocked XRP Transactions – When Does It Happen?

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-03-01Última atualização em 2026-03-01

Resumo

Former Ripple CTO David Schwartz clarified that Ripple cannot block transactions or freeze wallets on the XRP Ledger (XRPL). He explained that valid transactions can only be prevented if users collectively change the network’s validity rules. Schwartz also refuted claims that the XRPL is centralized due to Ripple’s Unique Node List, stating that such assertions are "objectively nonsensical." He emphasized that the XRPL was intentionally designed to be decentralized, ensuring that no single entity, including Ripple, can control or censor transactions. Schwartz noted that even if Ripple had such power, using it would destroy trust in the network. He also addressed comparisons to Bitcoin, highlighting key differences in how consensus is achieved between the two networks.

Former Ripple Chief Technology Officer (CTO) David Schwartz has addressed speculation that the crypto firm can block transactions on the XRP Ledger (XRPL). He explained the only way this could happen amid claims that the network is centralized.

Ripple CTO Emeritus Explains How An XRP Transaction Can Be Blocked

In an X post, the former Ripple CTO said that there is no way to prevent valid transactions on the XRP Ledger unless users agree to change the validity rules to make them invalid. Schwartz made this statement in response to whether Ripple or he, as one of the original developers, can freeze a wallet and prevent a transaction.

Meanwhile, in response to who can unlock and lock escrows, the former Ripple CTO said that anyone who wants to escrow tokens can lock them in escrow. Once an escrow expires, anyone can unlock it. Schwartz also addressed claims that the XRPL Ledger was centralized because Ripple has a “Unique Node List,” which effectively makes the validators permissioned.

The former Ripple CTO described the claims that the crypto firm could have absolute power and control of the chain as “objectively nonsensical.” He noted that this is similar to claiming that someone with a majority of mining power can create a billion BTC. Justin Bons, Cyber Capital’s founder, who made the claim, explained that he meant Ripple could double-spend or censor the network, similar to someone holding a majority of mining power on the Bitcoin network.

XRP is currently trading at $1.29. Chart: TradingView

Schwartz rebutted this claim, stating that the XRP Ledger and Bitcoin don’t work the same. He noted that on the XRPL, one can count the number of validators that agree with one’s node. The former Ripple CTO added that a node will not agree to double-spend or censor unless there is a particular reason why the validator wants to do so.

XRPL ‘Carefully’ Designed To Be Decentralized

The former Ripple CTO reiterated that they carefully and intentionally designed the XRP Ledger so that they could not control it. He explained that they did so, given the regulatory environment and practical realities of being a company and having investors. As such, there was no guarantee that they would always have control over their own actions.

Schwartz gave an example of how Ripple must honor U.S. court orders, as it cannot refuse such requests. As such, they decided from the onset that they did not want control over the XRP Ledger and that it would be to their benefit not to have control. He also mentioned that it would not make sense if Ripple ever censored transactions or double-spent, even if they had the power to do so, because if they ever did, it would destroy trust in the XRPL.

Featured image from GitHub, chart from TradingView

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat did former Ripple CTO David Schwartz clarify about the ability to block transactions on the XRP Ledger?

ADavid Schwartz clarified that there is no way to prevent valid transactions on the XRP Ledger unless users collectively agree to change the validity rules to make them invalid.

QAccording to Schwartz, who has the ability to lock and unlock escrows on the XRP Ledger?

AAnyone who wants to escrow tokens can lock them in escrow, and once an escrow expires, anyone can unlock it.

QHow did Schwartz respond to claims that the XRP Ledger is centralized due to Ripple's 'Unique Node List'?

ASchwartz described these claims as 'objectively nonsensical,' explaining that the XRP Ledger was carefully designed to be decentralized and that Ripple cannot control it.

QWhat key difference did Schwartz highlight between the XRP Ledger and Bitcoin regarding network control?

ASchwartz stated that the XRP Ledger and Bitcoin don't work the same way, noting that on XRPL, one can count validator agreement, and validators won't agree to double-spend or censor without a specific reason.

QWhy did Schwartz mention that it would not make sense for Ripple to censor transactions or double-spend, even if they had the power?

AHe explained that doing so would destroy trust in the XRP Ledger, which is against Ripple's interests, and they designed the ledger specifically to avoid having such control.

Leituras Relacionadas

Arbitrum Pretends to Be the Hacker, 'Steals' Back the Money Lost by KelpDAO

Title: Arbitrum Poses as Hacker to Recover Stolen Funds from KelpDAO Last week, KelpDAO suffered a hack resulting in nearly $300 million in losses, marking the largest DeFi security incident this year. Approximately 30,765 ETH (worth over $70 million) remained on an Arbitrum address controlled by the attacker. In an unprecedented move, Arbitrum’s Security Council utilized its emergency authority to upgrade the Inbox bridge contract, adding a function that allowed them to impersonate the hacker’s address and initiate a transfer without access to its private key. The council’s action, approved by 9 of its 12 members, moved the stolen ETH to a frozen address in a single transaction before reverting the contract to its original state. The operation was coordinated with law enforcement, which attributed the attack to North Korea’s Lazarus Group. Community reactions are divided: some praise the recovery of funds, while others question the centralization of power, as the council can upgrade core contracts without governance votes. However, such emergency mechanisms are common among major L2s. Despite the partial recovery, over $292 million was stolen in total, with more than $100 million in bad debt on Aave and remaining funds scattered across other chains. The incident highlights escalating security challenges in DeFi, with state-sponsored hackers employing advanced tactics and L2s responding with elevated countermeasures.

marsbitHá 2m

Arbitrum Pretends to Be the Hacker, 'Steals' Back the Money Lost by KelpDAO

marsbitHá 2m

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

The article "iQiyi Is Too Impatient" discusses the controversy surrounding the Chinese streaming platform IQiyi's recent announcement of an "AI Actor Library" during its 2026 World Conference. IQiyi claimed over 100 actors, including well-known names like Zhang Ruoyun and Yu Hewei, had joined the initiative. CEO Gong Yu suggested AI could enable actors to "star in 14 dramas a year instead of 4" and that "live-action filming might become a world cultural heritage." The announcement quickly sparked backlash. Multiple actors named in the list issued urgent statements denying they had signed any AI-related authorization agreements. This forced IQiyi to clarify that inclusion in the library only indicated a willingness to *consider* AI projects, with separate negotiations required for any specific role. The incident, which trended on social media with hashtags like "IQiyi is crazy," is presented as a sign of the company's growing desperation. Facing intense competition from short-video platforms like Douyin and Kuaishou, as well as Bilibili and Xiaohongshu, IQiyi's financial performance has weakened, with revenues declining for two consecutive years. The author argues that IQiyi is "too impatient" to tell a compelling AI story to reassure the market, especially as it pursues a listing on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The piece concludes by outlining three key "AI questions" IQiyi must answer: defining its role as a tool provider versus a content creator, balancing the "coldness" of AI with the human element audiences desire, and properly managing the interests of platforms, actors, and viewers. The core dilemma is that while AI can reduce costs and increase efficiency, it risks creating homogenized, formulaic content and devaluing human performers.

marsbitHá 56m

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

marsbitHá 56m

Jensen Huang Publicly Challenges Google and Amazon, Is the Chip Business Entirely Sustained by Anthropic?

In a candid interview, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang challenged competitors like Google and Amazon, admitted past strategic errors, and criticized U.S. export controls on AI chips. He framed Nvidia’s role as turning “electricity in, tokens out,” emphasizing the complexity and value of AI inference. Huang dismissed rival custom chips like Google’s TPU and Amazon’s Trainium as inflexible and niche, claiming their growth relies heavily on clients like Anthropic. He also acknowledged missing early investment opportunities in OpenAI and Anthropic. On China, Huang warned that export restrictions risk pushing the country toward self-sufficiency and could cost U.S. leadership in AI. Finally, he explained Nvidia’s acquisition of Groq as a move to serve premium, low-latency token markets. Throughout, Huang emphasized ecosystem trust and Nvidia’s central role in global AI infrastructure.

marsbitHá 1h

Jensen Huang Publicly Challenges Google and Amazon, Is the Chip Business Entirely Sustained by Anthropic?

marsbitHá 1h

ARK's SpaceX IPO Investment Guide: $1.75 Trillion Valuation, 95x Price-to-Sales Ratio, Where Is the Money Going?

ARK Invest, a major investor in SpaceX, provides an analysis following SpaceX's confidential IPO filing on April 1, 2026, targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation and up to $75 billion in funding for a Nasdaq listing around June 2026. This would be the largest IPO in history. The valuation implies a price-to-sales ratio of ~95x based on ~$18.5B in projected 2025 revenue. ARK argues this reflects future potential, not current reality. Key drivers include Starlink, with over 10M users and $20B+ in 2026 revenue, launch services which have reduced costs by ~95% since 2008, and the strategic merger with xAI in February 2026, enabling vertically integrated AI and orbital computing. ARK’s investment thesis is based on SpaceX's proven execution of ambitious goals, like reusable rockets and global satellite internet. The firm notes that significant value creation often occurs pre-IPO, and its Venture Fund offers exposure to SpaceX’s earlier private stages. Post-IPO, the fund will manage the position per standard lock-up and rebalancing processes, maintaining flexibility to reinvest in other private innovations. The analysis is based on public estimates and ARK research; the S-1 filing is not yet public. This is not investment advice.

marsbitHá 1h

ARK's SpaceX IPO Investment Guide: $1.75 Trillion Valuation, 95x Price-to-Sales Ratio, Where Is the Money Going?

marsbitHá 1h

Stablecoin Hype Overblown? Moody’s Says Banks Aren’t In Danger

The article discusses the legislative stalemate in the US over the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (CLARITY Act), which aims to regulate crypto assets. A key point of contention is whether stablecoins should be allowed to pay interest, with crypto companies opposing a ban and banks supporting it. Moody's analyst Abhi Srivastava states that, for now, stablecoins do not pose a significant threat to traditional banks due to existing efficient payment systems and the current prohibition on yield-bearing stablecoins. This limits their appeal for pulling deposits from banks at scale. However, with the stablecoin market cap exceeding $300 billion and growth in tokenized assets, banks could face future pressure from deposit outflows. The crypto industry warns that failure to pass the bill could lead to stricter regulatory crackdowns. Negotiations continue with little progress, despite both sides desiring a resolution.

bitcoinistHá 2h

Stablecoin Hype Overblown? Moody’s Says Banks Aren’t In Danger

bitcoinistHá 2h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片

Categorias popularesright-arrow

Etiquetas Popularesright-arrow