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

bitcoinistОпубликовано 2026-03-01Обновлено 2026-03-01

Введение

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

Связанные с этим вопросы

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.

Похожее

Apple Also Has to Pay Rent Now

Apple Pays Rent Too: The Two-Way Flow of "Traffic Tax" and "AI Capability Rent" Between Tech Giants For over two decades, Google has paid Apple an estimated $20 billion annually to remain the default search engine on Safari, a "traffic tax" for a critical user entry point. However, in 2026, the direction of this cash flow partially reversed. Apple agreed to pay Google roughly $1 billion per year to license its Gemini AI models, as Apple's own models reportedly struggled with complex tasks. This creates a unique dynamic: Apple acts as the "landlord" in the established search ecosystem, collecting rent from Google for access. Simultaneously, in the emerging AI arena, Apple becomes the "tenant," paying Google for access to cutting-edge AI capabilities it cannot currently match internally. While Apple claims its new models are "distilled" from Gemini outputs and contain "not a drop" of Google's original code, core dependencies remain. Its knowledge base is refined using Gemini's outputs, and its most powerful cloud model runs on Google's infrastructure. Apple has structured the deal as non-exclusive, allowing it to theoretically switch AI suppliers—a hedge against over-reliance. The future hinges on whether advanced AI models become a commodity (cheap and abundant) or remain a concentrated, scarce resource (expensive and controlled by few). Apple is betting on the former, leveraging its massive device ecosystem to be a powerful, choosy customer. If the latter proves true, its bargaining power could erode. This power dynamic is extending to developers. Apple, Google, and WeChat are all pushing for apps to expose their core functions as standardized "actions" or "intents" that their respective AI assistants (Siri, Gemini, WeChat AI) can directly call. The new scarce resource is no longer just app store visibility, but "being selected by the AI." The currency of "rent" has changed from a 30% revenue share to ceding control over how users interact with an app's functions.

marsbit11 мин. назад

marsbit11 мин. назад

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

With the excitement around SpaceX's recent public listing reigniting interest in the US stock market, Chinese investors face significant challenges accessing compliant and convenient trading channels following regulatory actions against major online brokers. This article explores the available options, highlighting their risks and limitations. Traditional paths for US stock investments remain problematic. Qualified Domestic Institutional Investor (QDII) and Listed Open-Ended Fund (LOF) products, while compliant, suffer from high fees, significant purchase premiums, and a very limited selection of assets. Small, unregulated offshore brokers pose substantial risks, including potential insolvency. While secure, VIP accounts at banks in Hong Kong or Singapore require high minimum deposits (often 1-2 million RMB) and in-person visits, placing them out of reach for most retail investors. The article positions cryptocurrency exchanges, specifically their TradFi (traditional finance on-chain) offerings, as a compelling alternative. Platforms like WEEX are noted for providing access to a wide range of US stocks and ETFs, including SpaceX (SPCXON), through tokenized assets. This method offers advantages such as a single account for both crypto and traditional assets, USDT-based settlement avoiding fiat complexities, flexible leverage, and robust risk management. To attract users, WEEX is promoting a "First Trade Guarantee" campaign. Running from June 15 to July 8 (UTC+8), it features a $30,000 prize pool. Users who trade $500 worth of US stock contracts can qualify for a guarantee on their first eligible trade: 100% loss coverage up to $30 or a 20% bonus on profits up to $30. The campaign is presented as a low-risk opportunity for both crypto natives and traditional investors to experience US stock trading.

marsbit13 мин. назад

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

marsbit13 мин. назад

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

How Hard Is It to Make a Chip? A Division Error Cost $475 Million Chip expert Shi Kan, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and a popular tech creator, explains the immense challenges of chip development. Chips are foundational to modern technology, but their creation is extraordinarily difficult. The journey from sand to a functional chip involves complex design and manufacturing, but a critical bottleneck is verification—ensuring the design works flawlessly before costly production. A single, undetected bug can have catastrophic consequences, as illustrated by the infamous 1994 Intel Pentium FDIV bug. A flaw in the floating-point division unit forced a recall costing $475 million. Unlike software, chips cannot be easily patched after manufacture, making "first-time success" paramount. However, industry surveys show only 24% of chip projects achieve this; over three-quarters require at least one costly re-spin due to design flaws. Verification has thus become the dominant phase, consuming up to 70% of the design cycle. The core challenge is a "verification impossible triangle" between high performance, good debuggability, and low cost. Exhaustively verifying a modern CPU core could take 15,000 years with software simulation, or 30 years with advanced hardware emulation—timeframes utterly impractical for development. Despite being essential, verification is often seen as unglamorous "dirty work," receiving less academic attention than fields like AI. Shi and his team are tackling this by developing an agile verification research framework called ENCORE, based on FPGA technology, to improve verification efficiency and debug capability. Beyond research, Shi engages in public science communication through long-form video content, aiming to demystify chip technology, AI, and computer science. He argues for the value of pursuing "hard and long-term" endeavors, whether in the meticulous world of chip verification or in creating substantive educational content, believing such sustained effort is likely the right path forward.

marsbit23 мин. назад

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

marsbit23 мин. назад

Claude to Mandate "Face-Scan ID Verification", No ID No Service Starting July?

Anthropic, the creator of Claude AI, has sent privacy policy update emails to users, signaling a significant shift. The key change, effective July 8, is the potential requirement for consumer-level users (Free, Pro, Max plans) to verify their age or identity. This verification would be conducted through the third-party service Persona, involving uploading a government-issued photo ID and taking a live selfie for comparison. Anthropic states this data is for security purposes only, will not be used for model training, and is processed by Persona, not stored on its own servers. The update also clarifies data handling for Claude's new capabilities: when performing multi-step tasks or connecting to third-party apps, user data may flow between Anthropic and those external services. Additionally, more information may be collected from users who participate in Anthropic research. This move is seen as a major step towards establishing accountability as AI agents become more powerful and autonomous, capable of executing complex, real-world tasks. It follows previous enforcement actions, like the banning of the "Fable 5" account, and indicates a broader industry trend toward stricter user identification and safety measures. The verification is expected to apply in specific scenarios, particularly as users engage Claude in more complex agentic workflows.

链捕手35 мин. назад

Claude to Mandate "Face-Scan ID Verification", No ID No Service Starting July?

链捕手35 мин. назад

Blockchain Has Finally Started to Sail into the Mainstream After 18 Years

Blockchain Finds Its True Path After 18 Years: Becoming the Financial Backbone for AI Agents and Autonomy This analysis explores a pivotal shift in the blockchain and crypto investment landscape, driven by the dominance of AI. Major venture capital firms, including Variant, Paradigm, Haun Ventures, and YZi Labs, are moving beyond pure "crypto" investment theses. They are expanding their focus to AI, robotics, and frontier tech, signaling that blockchain is no longer seen as a standalone sector but as an underlying infrastructure layer. The core argument is that blockchain's killer application may not be user-facing apps, but rather providing the economic rails for the coming wave of AI agents, autonomous robots, and automated systems. Key capabilities like self-custody wallets, programmable stablecoins for micropayments, on-chain identity, and verifiable smart contracts are positioned as essential for a future where machines conduct economic activity. The recent $1.4 billion investment by Tether (via its venture arm) in German robotics company NEURA Robotics exemplifies this, aiming to embed Tether's wallet tools directly into robots for autonomous transactions. While many "AI + Crypto" projects remain superficial, the article concludes that true value lies where crypto is a necessary component—enabling machine-to-machine payments, agent autonomy, verifiable data provenance, and open financial settlement for the AI era. For crypto venture capital, this convergence with AI represents both an adaptation to shifting capital flows and a potential path to unlocking the large-scale, non-speculative utility the industry has long sought.

marsbit43 мин. назад

Blockchain Has Finally Started to Sail into the Mainstream After 18 Years