Decentralization is a new concept that is very misunderstood due to its evolving nature. Many passionate crypts turn to Bitcoin and Ethereum as a yardstick for decentralized blockchain systems, so they are wrong in judging XRP. If the verdict is based on the two, it is true that the XRP register has higher scores than those of the two market leaders.
Buy aside the cryptographic policy and rip the XRP Ledger aside, you start to appreciate that it is more decentralized than that of Bitcoin and Ethereum. A simple look at design, you begin to appreciate the level of its decentralization. For one, blockchain power; transactions are not attributed to an individual or a group.
XRP Ledger is Consensus Backed
Whereas Bitcoin and Ethereum rely heavily on PoW (proof-of-work), the XRP register is consensus-driven. PoW algorithms reward outsiders called miners to validate transactions that are an attribute of decentralized systems, but the limits of the two equipment continue to move platforms towards centralization with "selected" selection entities that control huge ecosystem presences.
The validators of the XRP Ledger consent protocol are located all over the world and are made up of individual exchanges and institutions of digital goods. Validators are different from miners because their payments are not based on orders and validations.
According to David Ripples CTO, David Schwartz, the architect behind XRP Ledger:
"The XRP register is based on an inherently decentralized, democratic, consensus mechanism – that no party can control."
How does XRP decentralization arise?
The cost of transactions is a good measure to determine the level of decentralization in any crypto-ecosystem data. The miners of BTC and ETH are ready to receive better rewards. This pushed the transaction cost of assets to skyrocket, making them less attractive to investors. Payment systems will soon be made of real-life use cases.
Initially, the blocking premiums of BTC and Ethereum were high, which amortized the cost of the transaction. Due to the nature of the platform, premiums are decreasing and this is bound to compromise system security. If the PoW system can not support the miner keeping it safe, it is likely that hackers can make their way. Mining force reduction can easily be manipulated to put systems at risk compared to a large force that can not be compromised.
XRP is the opposite because the system can support itself without the data mining function. And it can still save on different resources, including time and computing power. With the commission escalation function on the XRP platform, the settlements are fast and have low costs that will make the platform the future payment hub.
Who is in XRP Ledger Control?
The entire XRP network requires 80% of all validation media to run for 14 days. Currently, the network has about 150 validators each with one vote, but it can work optimally with 10. With BTC and ETH a single miner can have 51% acquired hashing power that is not healthy for the leading marketing platforms.
XRP 14 days of waiting provides validators with sufficient time to update the software. This keeps the system safe as 80% is required to take the changes initiated by the validators. This blocks manipulation instances keeping the system safe and functioning optimally.
Ethereum and Bitcoin are moving to a more centralized corner while XRP is becoming the true decentralized outfit. XRP Ledger users have the power to remove untrustworthy validators from their UNL, so no group or individual can manipulate the system to meet their personal interests and this protects the investor.
With the best XRP competitors facing a myriad bottlenecks in their systems, XRP is becoming optimally operational over time and this increases its decentralization. However, time will tell how the platforms are still working on their process to impress investors, despite the ongoing crypts policy.