On August 18, Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin tweeted a series of tweets against Ripple and also its native coin, which has ignited widespread controversy on the internet. Following the XRP owner’s attorney, Ripple’s CTO reacted to the ETH owner’s statement.
Ripple referred them “China controlled”, Vitalik Buterin
Vitalik Buterin stated that Ripple previously referred to them as “China controlled.” He went on to say that they had forfeited their claim to shelter at this point. He did, however, point out that Ripple was attempting to argue that XRP wasn’t a commodity for public policy considerations.
XRP already lost their right to protection when they tried to throw us under the bus as "China-controlled" imo:https://t.co/t6cbMtjsEV
— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) August 17, 2022
David Schwartz, Ripple CTO, replied that “The government should punish projects that disagree with our narrative” seems pretty on brand for ETH.
"The goverment should punish projects that disagree with our narrative" seems pretty on brand for ETH.
— 𝙳𝚊𝚟𝚒𝚍 𝚂𝚌𝚑𝚠𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚣 (@JoelKatz) August 18, 2022
Ripple CTO David Schwartz questioned Vitalik Buterin if this dispute must be decided by the legislature or the marketplace.
Ripple CTO attacked Ethereum merger
Ripple CTO also attacked Ethereum’s much-anticipated merger. He went on to say that comparing miners in PoW systems to investors in the company is absolutely reasonable.
Schwartz used the instance of eBay investors, who profit from the remaining barrier between buyer and seller that the network does not get eradicated. Ripple CTO also mentioned that this is valid for ETH and BTC miners.
He went on to say that eBay investors desire as little resistance as possible between customers and sellers. It is because of the revenue generator, which is similar to Ethereum and Bitcoin miners. Nevertheless, this is the primary cause for their higher costs than XRPL.
Moreover, John Deaton, an XRP holder’s attorney, pushed ETH creator to explain his views on token holders. Furthermore, he stated that if the SEC had attacked the Ethereum organization and its inventors, he might have challenged the SEC.