波纹CTO David Schwartz最近确认，Ripple欠XRP的义务

输入：波纹CTO David Schwartz最近确认，Ripple欠XRP的义务，将这一想法归咎于XRP安全性虚假陈述。

Ripple CTO David Schwartz recently confirmed that the company owes no obligation to hold XRP, blaming this idea on those misrepresenting XRP security.

Ripple CTO CTO David Schwartz最近确认，该公司没有责任持有XRP的义务，将这一想法归咎于那些虚假的XRP安全性。

His comments came in response to an ongoing discussion about Ripple’s role in XRP’s distribution and its responsibilities toward token holders. For context, Bitcoin advocate and XRP critic, Pierre Rochard, argued that Ripple has no obligation to ensure XRP holders benefit from its actions. He asserted that the company is free to sell its large XRP holdings, even if it negatively impacts retail investors. According to him, this is what makes XRP a non-security.

他的评论是为了回应有关Ripple在XRP分销中的作用及其对令牌持有人的责任的持续讨论。对于上下文，比特币倡导者和XRP评论家皮埃尔·罗沙德（Pierre Rochard）认为，波纹没有义务确保XRP持有人从其行动中受益。他断言该公司可以自由出售其大型XRP控股，即使对零售投资者产生负面影响。据他说，这就是使XRP成为非安全性的原因。

Ripple Has No Obligation to HODL Its XRP Bag

Ripple没有义务hodl的XRP袋

Interestingly, Schwartz agreed, emphasizing that Ripple, like any other business, operates in its own best interest. He compared XRP ownership to possessing early artwork from an emerging artist.

有趣的是，施瓦茨同意，强调，像其他任何业务一样，Ripple以其自身的最大利益运作。他将XRP所有权与拥有新兴艺术家的早期艺术品进行了比较。

While investors might hope the artist continues to create value that benefits their holdings, there is no obligation for them to do so. He stressed that neither Ripple nor any company should be expected to act against its own interests to serve investors.

尽管投资者可能希望艺术家继续创造有利于其持股的价值，但他们没有义务这样做。他强调，不应期望波纹和任何公司都不得违背自己的利益行事，以服务投资者。

Amid this disclosure, the Ripple CTO also pointed out that Ripple has been an established player in the industry for nearly 14 years. The company holds more XRP than it could feasibly liquidate in a short timeframe. Notably, this alleviates fears that it could dump all its holdings in the short-term.

在这一披露中，Ripple CTO还指出，Ripple已成为该行业的一名成熟参与者已有近14年了。该公司持有的XRP超出了在短时间内可以清算的可行清算。值得注意的是，这减轻了人们担心它会在短期内抛弃其所有股份。

Also, Schwartz dismissed the idea that Ripple could be the only major crypto company to succeed, likening the notion to expecting Google to be the sole winner in the internet industry.

另外，施瓦茨（Schwartz）驳斥了Ripple可能是唯一成功的加密公司的想法，将其比作期望Google成为互联网行业唯一赢家的想法。

Notably, his comments echo Ripple’s defense in its ongoing legal battle with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which began in December 2020. For context, the SEC alleged that Ripple had an obligation to ensure XRP holders observed gains on their holdings, a theory that the firm has rebuffed.

值得注意的是，他的评论在与美国证券交易委员会（SEC）的持续法律斗争中呼应了辩护，该委员会始于2020年12月。在上下文中，SEC指控Ripple有义务确保XRP持有人在其持股中观察到收益，这一理论认为该公司已被拒绝。

XRP Not a Security

XRP不是安全性

Following Schwartz’s latest remarks, a prominent Ripple critic known as “ScamDaddy” shared a screenshot of the conversation, questioning why anyone would be surprised by Ripple prioritizing its business goals, implying that this has always been clear.

在施瓦茨（Schwartz）的最新讲话之后，一位著名的连锁批评家被称为“ scamdaddy”，分享了对话的屏幕截图，质疑为什么有人会因为优先考虑其业务目标而感到惊讶，这意味着这始终很明确。

Schwartz responded by suggesting that most of the confusion about Ripple’s role in XRP’s ecosystem stems from those pushing the narrative that XRP is a security. He implied that this group has deliberately misrepresented the relationship between Ripple and XRP.

施瓦茨（Schwartz）提出了关于波纹在XRP生态系统中的作用的大部分混乱，这是因为那些推动XRP是安全性的叙述的人。他暗示，这个群体故意歪曲了Ripple和XRP之间的关系。

“It’s mostly the ‘XRP is a security’ crowd that deliberately created confusion about the relationship between Ripple and XRP,” the Ripple executive said in a post on X.

Ripple主管在X上的一篇文章中说：“主要是'XRP是一个安全'人群，故意对Ripple和XRP之间的关系感到困惑。”

Notably, further discussion arose when XRPL validator Vet pointed out that individuals who believe Ripple owes XRP holders an obligation to HODL are also those claiming that Ripple was responsible for issuing XRP.

值得注意的是，当XRPL验证者兽医指出，那些相信Ripple欠XRP持有人的个人对HODL的义务也是那些声称Ripple负责发行XRP的人的义务时，就进行了进一步的讨论。

In response, “ScamDaddy” acknowledged that the term “issued” is widely debated but maintained that Ripple’s founders created both the XRP Ledger and the token, later distributing it.

作为回应，“ Scamdaddy”承认“发行”一词是广泛争议的，但坚持认为Ripple的创始人既创建了XRP Ledger和Token，又创建了它，后来又分发了它。

However, Vet countered this, clarifying that the XRP Ledger existed before Ripple as a company. He acknowledged that there was an overlap between the individuals who developed the technology and those who later established Ripple, but he stressed that the two entities were not synonymous.

但是，兽医对此表示反对，澄清了XRP Ledger在Ripple作为公司之前存在。他承认，开发该技术的个人与后来建立波纹的人之间存在重叠，但他强调这两个实体不是同义词。