TLDR
- David Schwartz said XRPL was built to prevent Ripple from controlling the network.
- Validators on XRPL use independent Unique Node Lists chosen by each node.
- Consensus rounds occur about every five seconds to prevent double-spending.
- Schwartz stated dishonest validators cannot force honest nodes to accept invalid transactions.
David Schwartz has rejected claims that the XRP Ledger is centralized. The Ripple CTO Emeritus described the allegations as “objectively nonsensical” on X.
The comments came after Justin Bons criticized several blockchain networks. Bons urged users to reject what he called centralized blockchains, including Ripple.
Debate Over XRPL Centralization
Justin Bons, founder and CIO of Cyber Capital, posted a detailed thread on X. He argued that Ripple’s Unique Node List structure creates central control risks.
Bons claimed that Ripple could gain “absolute power” over the network through the UNL. He also grouped Ripple with Stellar, Hedera, and Algorand in his criticism.
Schwartz responded directly to the thread. He said the XRP Ledger was designed to prevent Ripple from controlling it.
He explained that this design choice was intentional and based on regulatory concerns. Ripple, as a U.S. company, must comply with court orders.
“Ripple, for example, has to honor US court orders. It cannot say no,” Schwartz wrote. He added that the company did not want such authority over the ledger.
How the Unique Node List Works
Schwartz described how the Unique Node List operates within XRPL. Each node selects its own list of trusted validators.
A node only counts votes from validators it has chosen. This process is independent and not dictated by Ripple.
If a validator behaves dishonestly, honest nodes reject its input. The dishonest validator is then treated as disagreeing with the protocol rules.
Schwartz said validators cannot force honest nodes to accept invalid transactions. They also cannot compel nodes to confirm a double-spend.
He acknowledged that validators could attempt to halt the network. However, this would resemble a dishonest majority attack seen in other systems.
Even in that scenario, he stated double-spending would remain impossible. The solution would be for users to update their UNL selections.
Safeguards Against Double Spending and Censorship
Schwartz addressed claims about censorship and transaction ordering. He said no XRPL transaction has faced malicious reordering or censorship.
“Nothing like this has ever happened to an XRPL transaction,” he stated on X. He contrasted this with transaction disputes on other networks. The XRP Ledger resolves transactions through consensus rounds. These rounds occur roughly every five seconds.
During each round, validators vote on proposed transactions. Transactions are included only if they meet protocol rules. Each node verifies the outcome independently. This structure reduces the risk of coordinated manipulation.
Schwartz maintained that Ripple does not control validator decisions. He said the network’s architecture protects against centralized authority.
He also noted that the company benefits from lacking direct control. This approach limits regulatory conflicts and external pressure. The exchange on X has renewed attention on XRPL governance. However, Schwartz has reiterated that the system was built to avoid central control.
Get 3 Free Stock Ebooks
Discover top-performing stocks in AI, Crypto, and Technology with expert analysis.
- Top 10 AI Stocks - Leading AI companies
- Top 10 Crypto Stocks - Blockchain leaders
- Top 10 Tech Stocks - Tech giants
