Ripple首席技术官David Schwartz在投资者称其为“ Vaporware Ponzi”之后，在激烈的在线辩论中为XRP辩护。

讨论源于对在美国潜在战略储备中纳入XRP的担忧。

A heated online debate unfolded between Ripple CTO David Schwartz and an investor, Jonnie King, after the latter called XRP a “vaporware ponzi” in an opinion piece. The discussion arose from concerns over the inclusion of XRP in the U.S potential strategic reserves.

Ripple首席技术官David Schwartz和投资者Jonnie King之间进行了激烈的在线辩论。讨论源于对在美国潜在战略储备中纳入XRP的担忧。

The debate, which took place on X (formerly Twitter), stemmed from a recent article in TheStreet discussing the possibility of U.S. strategic reserves holding cryptocurrencies. In his article, King expressed skepticism over XRP’s suitability for such an inclusion.

这场辩论是在X（以前是Twitter）上进行的，源于TheStreet上最近的一篇文章，讨论了美国战略储备的可能性。金在他的文章中对XRP对这种包容性的适用性表示怀疑。

King argued that XRP was still under centralized control, in contrast to Bitcoin (BTC), which was designed to be decentralized from the outset. He asserted that Ripple’s influence over XRP’s supply made it unfit for the U.S. strategic reserve.

金认为，与比特币（BTC）相比，XRP仍处于集中控制之下，比特币（BTC）从一开始就被分散。他断言，Ripple对XRP供应的影响使美国战略储备不适合。

“They have 50% of the supply locked in an escrow system and release large amounts of tokens monthly to be sold, allowing them to manipulate the price and make revenue,” King said.

金说：“他们有50％的供应量锁定在托管系统中，并每月释放大量令牌，使他们可以操纵价格并赚取收入。”

He also alleged that Ripple could alter the release schedule of escrowed tokens at any time, giving it undue influence over market dynamics.

他还声称，波纹可以随时改变托管令牌的发布时间表，从而对市场动态产生不当的影响。

Moreover, King pointed to Ripple’s political involvement, noting that Ripple’s executive Chairman, Chris Larsen, donated to Kamala Harris’s campaign. Following Donald Trump’s victory, the company itself contributed to Trump’s inauguration.

此外，金指出了Ripple的政治参与，并指出Ripple的执行董事长Chris Larsen向Kamala Harris的竞选捐款。在唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）的胜利之后，该公司本身为特朗普的就职典礼做出了贡献。

Schwartz challenged King to discuss XRP’s actual technology instead of its market mechanics or corporate governance. He asked King to highlight any aspect of XRPL that he found interesting, steering the conversation away from the popular FUD narrative about XRP.

施瓦茨（Schwartz）挑战金，讨论XRP的实际技术，而不是其市场机制或公司治理。他要求金突出他发现有趣的XRPL的任何方面，将谈话从关于XRP的流行叙述中转移出来。

“I’d rather discuss any aspect of the XRP Ledger’s technology that interests you,” Schwartz said.

Schwartz说：“我宁愿讨论XRP分类帐的任何方面对您感兴趣的技术。”

However, King dismissed the request, arguing that XRP’s technology was irrelevant if Ripple maintained control over the asset. He went on to repeat his statements about pre-mined tokens, missing ledger entries, and a lack of smart contract capabilities, calling XRPL “a highly centralized ledger with missing entries.”

但是，金驳回了该请求，认为如果波纹保持对资产的控制权，XRP的技术是无关紧要的。他继续重复有关预先开采的令牌，缺少账本的条目以及缺乏智能合同功能的陈述，称XRPL为“一个高度集中的分类帐，缺少参赛作品”。

Schwartz countered by questioning whether King understood XRPL’s consensus model, decentralized exchange (DEX), and how it prevents network reorganizations. He also pointed out contradictions in King’s arguments, noting that XRP was labeled “vaporware” and “outdated tech from 2012” in the same discussion.

施瓦兹（Schwartz）通过质疑金是否理解XRPL的共识模型，分散交流（DEX）以及如何防止网络重组来反驳。他还指出了金的论点中的矛盾，并指出XRP在同一讨论中被标记为“蒸发器软件”和“ 2012年过时的技术”。

“It’s interesting that you call the world’s third-largest blockchain technology ‘vaporware’ and claim it’s ‘outdated tech from 2012’ in the same comment,” Schwartz said.

Schwartz说：“有趣的是，您将世界第三大区块链技术称为“蒸气软件”，并在同一评论中声称它是“ 2012年过时的技术”。”

Centralization vs. Decentralization

集中化与权力下放

King went on to insist that XRP’s design made it inferior to Bitcoin. He claimed that its consensus mechanism was based on centralized trust and could be compromised if bad actors colluded within the Unique Node List (UNL).

金继续坚持认为XRP的设计使其不如比特币。他声称其共识机制是基于集中信任的，如果不良演员在唯一的节点列表中串通（UNL），可能会受到损害。

“Anyone can become a validator in Bitcoin’s PoW system, but in XRP’s system, only the 20 nodes decide who can participate in validation,” King said.

金说：“任何人都可以成为比特币POW系统的验证者，但是在XRP的系统中，只有20个节点决定谁可以参与验证。”

He contrasted this with Bitcoin’s proof-of-work model, which allows anyone to become a validator. Schwartz pushed back, emphasizing that XRPL’s features, such as its DEX and non-native asset support, provided functionality that other blockchains lacked.

他将其与比特币的工作证明模型进行了对比，该模型使任何人都可以成为验证者。 Schwartz向后推，强调XRPL的功能（例如其DEX和非本地资产支持）提供了其他区块链缺乏的功能。

However, King dismissed the XRPL DEX as “trust-based” and lacking programmability.

但是，金将XRPL DEX视为“基于信任的”，缺乏可编程性。

No matter how much Schwartz tried to shift the focus to XRPL’s tech, King held firm that governance and control problems were more important than any tech XRP might offer.

不管施瓦茨（Schwartz）试图将重点转移到XRPL的技术方面，金（King）坚持认为，治理和控制问题比任何技术XRP更重要。

The debate highlights the gap between XRP supporters and critics, including Bitcoin enthusiasts. While XRP fans believe the token deserves inclusion in the U.S. strategic reserve, Bitcoin purists (maxis) believe only BTC qualifies for such an initiative.

辩论突出了XRP支持者和评论家（包括比特币爱好者）之间的差距。尽管XRP粉丝认为令牌值得包含在美国战略储备中，但比特币纯粹主义者（Maxis）认为，BTC只有资格获得这样的计划。