Ripple, Stellar Show Up In New Epstein Files, Ex-CTO Schwartz Reacts

bitcoinistОпубликовано 2026-02-03Обновлено 2026-02-03

Введение

Newly released Jeffrey Epstein documents include a 2014 email from Blockstream co-founder Austin Hill that mentions Ripple and Stellar. In the email, Hill reportedly complained to Epstein and others about investors supporting competing projects, framing backers of Ripple or Stellar as "enemies/opponents" to his Bitcoin-centric ecosystem. Former Ripple CTO David Schwartz publicly responded, stating he knows of no direct connections between Epstein and either Ripple, XRP, or Stellar. He emphasized there is no evidence that anyone from these projects met with Epstein or his close associates. Schwartz criticized the "enemy/opponent" mindset as harmful to the entire crypto space and dismissed the notion of deeper involvement as speculative conspiracy. He also addressed a question about Ripple's for-profit structure versus Stellar's non-profit, revealing he had opposed the non-profit model early on, believing it seemed dishonest and borderline illegal. At the time of reporting, XRP was trading at $1.64.

Ripple and Stellar were pulled into a fresh round of social-media speculation this weekend after newly surfaced emails from the Epstein document release appeared to reference the two projects in a 2014 investor dispute. Former Ripple CTO David Schwartz pushed back publicly, saying he knows of no direct links between Epstein and either network, and framed the episode as another example of tribal politics bleeding into crypto.

Schwartz Reacts After Epstein Docs Mention Ripple, Stellar

The spark came from a screenshot circulating on X that shows an email chain in which Austin Hill (co-founder of Blockstream) complained to a group of high-profile recipients, including Epstein, about investors allocating capital across competing projects. According to Schwartz, the document “is an email from Austin Hill to Jeffrey Epstein explaining that Hill felt that support for Ripple or Stellar made someone an enemy/opponent,” adding that Hill likely shared similar views “to many other people.”

As the image spread, some posts characterized the mere inclusion of Ripple and Stellar in the email as evidence of deeper involvement. Schwartz responded with a message that tried to separate inflammatory framing from what the document actually shows.

“I don’t know of any connections between Jeffrey Epstein and Ripple, XRP, or Stellar. [I don’t know of] any evidence anyone at Ripple or Stellar ever met with Epstein or anyone closely connected to him,” he wrote. “There are some indirect ties between Epstein and people connected to Bitcoin in various ways, but that’s probably true of most very wealthy people.”

Source: X @JoelKatz

Schwartz’s first post on the thread captured the mood of the day, both suspicion and a reluctance to feed it. “I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this is just the tip of a giant iceberg,” he wrote while linking to the DOJ-hosted file. He later argued the more corrosive issue was the “enemy/opponent” mindset, writing that “we really are all in this together and this kind of attitude hurts everyone in the space.”

In the underlying 2014 email described in the source material, Hill is portrayed as objecting to backers funding multiple “horses” at once, treating support for Ripple or Stellar as hostile to the bitcoin-centric “ecosystem” he was building at Blockstream. Reports summarizing the chain say it was sent to Joichi Ito, Epstein, and Reid Hoffman, and included language that investors in both camps were “backing two horses in the same race.”

The resurfaced email also revived an older fault line in how early projects structured themselves. In response to a user asking about Ripple versus Stellar’s nonprofit posture, Schwartz said the idea was debated early on and that he opposed it.

“We discussed it in the early days. I was strongly against it because it seemed dishonest and borderline illegal to have a non-profit whose success was so tied to the gains of private parties,” he wrote. “It felt, at least to me, like Walmart creating a non-profit to help educate people about how much money they could save by shopping at Walmart.”

At press time, XRP traded at $1.64.

XRP holds above the 0.618 Fib, 1-week chart | Source: XRPUSDT on TradingView.com

Связанные с этим вопросы

QWhat sparked the recent social-media speculation involving Ripple and Stellar?

AThe speculation was ignited by a screenshot of a 2014 email chain from the Epstein document release, in which Blockstream co-founder Austin Hill complained to Jeffrey Epstein and others about investors allocating capital across competing projects like Ripple and Stellar.

QHow did former Ripple CTO David Schwartz respond to the allegations of connections between Epstein and Ripple/Stellar?

ADavid Schwartz publicly stated that he knows of no direct connections between Jeffrey Epstein and Ripple, XRP, or Stellar, and that he was unaware of any evidence that anyone at Ripple or Stellar had ever met with Epstein or anyone closely connected to him.

QWhat was the main complaint in Austin Hill's 2014 email as described in the article?

AIn the email, Austin Hill objected to investors funding multiple competing projects simultaneously, characterizing support for Ripple or Stellar as being hostile to the bitcoin-centric 'ecosystem' he was building at Blockstream, and referred to it as 'backing two horses in the same race.'

QWhat did David Schwartz identify as the more corrosive issue in the crypto space, beyond the Epstein speculation?

ASchwartz argued that the more corrosive issue was the 'enemy/opponent' mindset, stating that 'we really are all in this together and this kind of attitude hurts everyone in the space.'

QWhat was David Schwartz's stated position on Ripple adopting a non-profit structure in its early days?

ASchwartz said he was strongly opposed to the idea of Ripple becoming a non-profit because he felt it seemed dishonest and borderline illegal to have a non-profit whose success was so tied to the gains of private parties, comparing it to 'Walmart creating a non-profit to help educate people about how much money they could save by shopping at Walmart.'

Похожее

From Robinhood to Polymarket: Is the Era of Integrating All Assets on a Single Platform Coming?

From Robinhood to Polymarket: The Era of All-in-One Asset Platforms Is Coming Asset classes are rapidly converging. Platforms that once specialized in single categories—such as stocks, cryptocurrencies, or prediction markets—are now moving toward offering all three. Robinhood pioneered this model, starting with equities, adding crypto in 2018, and prediction markets in 2025. This strategy has proven resilient: when crypto revenues fell, other segments like options and stocks filled the gap. Now, prediction market leaders Polymarket and Kalshi are moving in the same direction, both announcing perpetual futures trading on April 21, 2026, pending regulatory approval. These futures will cover assets like Bitcoin, gold, and stocks such as Nvidia. This trend mirrors the consolidation seen in consumer tech, like smartphones replacing dedicated cameras and MP3 players. Younger users, accustomed to interacting with multiple asset types from an early age, will increasingly demand unified platforms. A key competitive advantage in prediction markets is collateral utilization—idle assets locked during betting periods. Polymarket’s move into perpetuals may be a strategy to generate yield from that capital, similar to earlier DeFi integrations like PolyAave. As the regulatory landscape evolves, traditional finance is also likely to incorporate crypto and prediction markets, further accelerating this convergence.

marsbit7 мин. назад

From Robinhood to Polymarket: Is the Era of Integrating All Assets on a Single Platform Coming?

marsbit7 мин. назад

OpenAI Goes Left, DeepSeek Goes Right

On April 24, 2026, DeepSeek released V4, a Chinese large language model offering a free "million-token context window," enabling it to process vast amounts of data like entire books or years of corporate documents in one go. In contrast, OpenAI’s GPT-5.5, released around the same time, is more powerful but significantly more expensive, charging up to $180 per million output tokens. DeepSeek’s strategy represents a shift from a pure AI research firm to a heavy-infrastructure player, building data centers in Inner Mongolia’s Ulanqab to bypass U.S. chip export restrictions. This move, supported by Huawei’s Ascend chips and China’s cheap green electricity, highlights a fundamental divergence in AI development models: U.S. firms focus on high-cost, high-margin services, while Chinese players like DeepSeek prioritize accessibility and affordability. Facing intense talent poaching from tech giants, DeepSeek is seeking a $44 billion valuation funding round to retain researchers and scale infrastructure. Meanwhile, Chinese manufacturers are compressing AI models to run on smartphones, making AI accessible offline and across the Global South. Through open-source models and localized solutions, Chinese AI is empowering non-English speakers and low-income users, driving a form of "digital equality." While Silicon Valley builds walled gardens, DeepSeek and others are turning AI into a public utility—like tap water—flowing freely to those previously left behind.

marsbit33 мин. назад

OpenAI Goes Left, DeepSeek Goes Right

marsbit33 мин. назад

$292 Million KelpDAO Cross-Chain Bridge Hack: Who Should Foot the Bill?

On April 18, 2026, an attacker stole 116,500 rsETH (worth ~$292M) from KelpDAO’s cross-chain bridge in 46 minutes—the largest DeFi exploit of 2026. The stolen assets were deposited into Aave V3 as collateral, causing $177–200M in bad debt and triggering a cascade of losses across nine DeFi protocols. Aave’s TVL dropped by ~$6B overnight. This legal analysis argues that KelpDAO and LayerZero Labs share concurrent liability, with fault apportioned 60%/40%. KelpDAO negligently configured its bridge with a 1-of-1 decentralized verifier network (DVN)—a single point of failure—despite LayerZero’s explicit recommendation of a 2-of-3 setup. LayerZero, which operated the compromised DVN, failed to secure its RPC infrastructure against a known poisoning attack vector. Both protocols’ terms of service cap liability at $200 (KelpDAO) or $50 (LayerZero), but these limits are likely unenforceable due to unconscionability, gross negligence exceptions, and potential securities law invalidation (if rsETH is deemed a security under the Howey test). Aave’s governance also faces fiduciary duty claims for raising rsETH’s loan-to-value ratio to 93%—far above competitors’ 72–75%—without adequately assessing bridge risks, amplifying the systemic fallout. Practical recovery targets include LayerZero Labs (a registered Canadian entity), KelpDAO’s founders, auditors, and identifiable Aave governance delegates. The incident underscores escalating legal risks for DeFi protocols, infrastructure providers, and governance participants.

marsbit1 ч. назад

$292 Million KelpDAO Cross-Chain Bridge Hack: Who Should Foot the Bill?

marsbit1 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片