- Hoskinson says banks are rebuilding Web3 systems without understanding decentralization principles.
- XRP and Midnight already support settlement, privacy, and compliance at scale.
- Legacy finance faces slower innovation due to permissioned governance models.
A fresh discussion around blockchain infrastructure followed comments from Charles Hoskinson that challenged recent legacy finance initiatives. In a post on X, Hoskinson said traditional financial players are attempting to recreate systems that already function within Web3. He pointed to XRP Ledger and Cardano’s Midnight as examples of technologies institutional builders continue to underestimate.
Rather than highlighting token prices, Hoskinson focused on architectural intent and execution depth. He argued that projects such as Canton reflect an institutional effort to rediscover decentralized settlement and privacy aware compliance. However, he stressed that these systems remain heavily constrained. He described the difference as a 100x gap in ambition, scalability, and design flexibility.
Significantly, XRP Ledger launched with institutional settlement as its core mission. Its framework emphasized fast finality, minimal transaction costs, and global liquidity movement. As a result, many capabilities now discussed by banks already exist within its infrastructure.
Meanwhile, Cardano adopted a parallel but distinct strategy. The network embraced a compliance friendly model without undermining decentralization. Its layered design separates settlement from computation. This structure supports upgrades while maintaining predictable execution. Additionally, Cardano invested early in peer reviewed research and formal verification.
Also Read: Bitcoin Whales Quietly Load Up as Price Stalls Near $89K Signals Brewing Move
Web3 Architecture Continues to Outpace Institutional Replicas
Moreover, Hoskinson highlighted Midnight as a clear example of misunderstood innovation. The privacy focused network enables programmable confidentiality alongside regulatory alignment. This approach allows selective disclosure while preserving user control. Consequently, institutions are now confronting challenges that Web3 networks addressed years earlier.
Beyond technical design, Hoskinson criticized governance approaches within legacy finance led chains. Strict permissioning and reliance on off chain guarantees often slow development cycles. These constraints differ sharply from Cardano’s on chain governance and extended UTXO model. As a result, Web3 platforms retain flexibility while upholding security assurances.
Additionally, Hoskinson referenced market behavior surrounding XRP and ADA. Extended consolidation phases reflect infrastructure maturity rather than stagnation. These assets experienced prolonged redistribution instead of speculative excess. Their price structures align more closely with long term development cycles.
Importantly, the remarks did not frame XRP or ADA as guaranteed price winners. The central issue remains problem resolution. Decentralized settlement, compliance aware privacy, and scalable governance already operate within Web3 systems.
Ultimately, Hoskinson’s comments underline a recurring theme in crypto development. Legacy finance continues to equate control with innovation. Web3 advanced by shipping functional systems during uncertainty. That contrast explains why XRP Ledger and Midnight remain benchmarks as institutions revisit decentralized architecture.
Also Read: Putin Claims US Eyes Crypto Mining at Nuclear Plant Amid Secret Peace Talks
