Charles Hoskinson Blasts Ripple For Backing Bill That Could Crush Competition

bitcoinist发布于2026-03-31更新于2026-03-31

文章摘要

Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson has sharply criticized Ripple and its CEO Brad Garlinghouse for supporting proposed U.S. legislation that would classify most new tokens as securities by default. Hoskinson argues this approach would harm competition, protect established players like Ripple through exemptions, and remove legal protections for DeFi and open-source developers. He warns the bill replicates the SEC’s aggressive regulatory stance and could expose software creators to unreasonable liability. Hoskinson also addressed the XRP community, clarifying that his criticism targets Ripple’s lobbying—not the token itself—and contrasted Ripple’s “mammoth premine” with Cardano’s more distributed token distribution.

Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson used a lengthy weekly livestream to level one of his sharpest recent attacks at Ripple, arguing that the company is backing legislation that could entrench incumbents, weaken DeFi protections, and make it harder for new crypto projects to compete.

The core of Hoskinson’s complaint was not aimed at XRP holders, but at what he described as Ripple’s policy posture in Washington and the behavior of CEO Brad Garlinghouse. In Hoskinson’s telling, Ripple is pushing for rules that would classify new tokens as securities by default while benefiting from carve-outs that would leave larger, established players in a stronger position.

Hoskinson Takes Aim At Ripple Over Competition Fight

Hoskinson said Garlinghouse was “trying to pass a bill that makes everything by default a security until proven otherwise,” calling that framework a non-starter for the broader market. He argued that such an approach would effectively recreate the kind of regulatory pressure that former SEC Chair Gary Gensler brought to the sector, only this time through legislation supported by industry actors rather than enforcement alone.

“He’s trying to pass a bill that makes everything by default a security until proven otherwise, which was the treatment Gary Gensler inflicted on his own ecosystem,” Hoskinson said. “It’s a non-starter, because he knows that he’s going to get an exemption and it reduces competition. So, [expletive] the whole industry. It’s bad behavior.”

That argument sat at the center of a wider rant about market structure, lobbying, and what Hoskinson sees as crypto’s growing willingness to trade open competition for regulatory protection. He said he had already laid out “four different attack vectors” the SEC could use if such a bill were enacted, and warned that the damage would not stop with token issuers.

According to Hoskinson, the proposal would also leave open-source developers exposed by stripping out protections for DeFi builders. “The bill also removed all developer protections for DeFi developers,” he said. “Who takes care of the Tornado Cash people and these other people writing open-source software? We can’t live in a space where you have transitive unlimited liability.”

He extended that point with one of the livestream’s longer analogies, arguing that holding software developers liable for downstream use of their code would amount to a category error. “You write code and people you’ve never met use that code in places you’ve never been to and you’re held absolutely liable for that,” Hoskinson said. “That’s equivalent to you writing a book, someone reads the book and murders somebody based on a character in your book and then you get charged with murder. It’s basically the same thing.”

Hoskinson also took aim at what he described as the XRP community’s reflexive defense of Ripple whenever he criticizes the company. He said there is “no path for people to listen to the content” of his argument because any criticism of Garlinghouse is treated as an attack on XRP itself. He pushed back on that framing by noting that he publicly supported Ripple when the SEC sued the company years ago, but said that did not obligate him to back its current lobbying goals.

“Guys, I did support you when you got sued by the Securities Exchange Commission,” he said. “There’s videos of me. You can pull them up from years ago where I said it was the wrong decision.”

From there, Hoskinson shifted into one of crypto’s oldest fault lines: token distribution. He argued that Ripple had no need for outside help in its legal fight because the organization “gave themselves a mammoth premine,” saying the company already had the resources to defend itself and pursue acquisitions. He contrasted that with Cardano, saying, “I didn’t give myself 70% of the ADA supply.”

At press time, XRP traded at $1.35.

XRP falls below the 200-week EMA again, 1-week chart | Source: XRPUSDT on TradingView.com

相关问答

QWhat is Charles Hoskinson's main criticism against Ripple in this article?

ACharles Hoskinson criticizes Ripple for backing legislation that would classify new tokens as securities by default, which he believes would entrench incumbents, weaken DeFi protections, reduce competition, and benefit established players like Ripple through exemptions.

QAccording to Hoskinson, what negative consequences would the proposed bill have for DeFi developers?

AHoskinson states the bill would remove developer protections for DeFi builders, exposing open-source developers to 'transitive unlimited liability' where they could be held liable for how others use their code, similar to holding an author responsible if someone committed murder after reading their book.

QHow does Hoskinson contrast Cardano's token distribution with Ripple's?

AHoskinson contrasts the two by stating that Ripple 'gave themselves a mammoth premine' of XRP, giving them ample resources, while emphasizing 'I didn't give myself 70% of the ADA supply' for Cardano.

QWhat does Hoskinson say about the XRP community's response to his criticism of Ripple?

AHoskinson says the XRP community has a reflexive defense mechanism where any criticism of Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse is treated as an attack on XRP itself, making it difficult for people to actually listen to the content of his arguments.

QWhat historical support does Hoskinson mention he provided to Ripple, and how does it relate to his current stance?

AHoskinson mentions he publicly supported Ripple years ago when the SEC sued the company, calling it 'the wrong decision,' but clarifies that this past support does not obligate him to back Ripple's current lobbying efforts for what he considers anti-competitive legislation.

你可能也喜欢

股票跌得比加密货币还狠,钱去了哪?

7月底,韩国Kospi指数罕见连续两天触发熔断,全球半导体股集体暴跌。SK海力士业绩虽创纪录但不及预期,股价重挫,其两倍做多杠杆ETF市值更蒸发超万亿港元。与此同时,比特币却从低点反弹约15%,呈现“股票跌出币圈样,比特币装死躺赢”的反常局面。 此次暴跌并非全市场恐慌,而是对前期最拥挤交易(如AI半导体)的精准去杠杆。催化剂包括不及预期的财报、中国存储芯片扩产带来的竞争压力,以及日元套息交易平仓带来的流动性压力。分析认为,产业逻辑未死,死的是过高的杠杆。 那么,从股市流出的资金是否流入了比特币?答案是否定的。比特币的相对抗跌,是因为它在5月至6月已提前经历大幅调整,美国现货比特币ETF曾出现历史性资金外流。真正的避险资金流向了黄金。数据显示,比特币与黄金的相关性已降至极低水平,“数字黄金”叙事在此次危机中暂时失效。机构将两者视为不同资产:黄金用于避险,比特币用于博弈高波动回报。 资金未来的流向取决于三个条件:全球流动性压力缓解、美联储在不引发衰退的前提下降息,以及美国CLARITY加密法案的最终落地。当前,比特币与纳斯达克指数的走势正在脱钩,其价格更依赖全球流动性而非单一科技股盈利。这种低相关性可能使其在未来成为机构资产配置中分散风险的选择。尽管当前并非避风港,但比特币已提前出清,为未来资本重新配置占据了有利位置。

marsbit9分钟前

股票跌得比加密货币还狠,钱去了哪?

marsbit9分钟前

交易

现货
活动图片