Kaspa (KAS) 與 Ripple (XRP)：哪個是更好的加密項目？

Kaspa 和 Ripple 是兩個加密項目，它們的運作和代表的含義截然不同。他們都擁有強大的社區，如果他們的看漲指標與他們保持一致，那麼他們就有巨大收益的潛力。

Cryptocurrency project Kaspa (KAS) has been rallying lately, fueled by bullish technical indicators and a growing community. But a recent analysis by a crypto expert highlights the contrasting strengths of Kaspa and another prominent crypto project, Ripple (XRP).

在看漲的技術指標和不斷增長的社區的推動下，加密貨幣項目 Kaspa (KAS) 最近一直在上漲。但加密專家最近的一項分析強調了 Kaspa 和另一個著名加密項目 Ripple (XRP) 的對比優勢。

In a recent discussion on X (NYSE:PARA), crypto analyst Steven Schlangenreich raised interesting points regarding the two crypto projects and their contrasting characteristics. Kaspa, known for its true decentralization and community-driven approach, stands in stark contrast to XRP’s centralized structure and close relationship with traditional financial institutions.

在最近關於 X（NYSE：PARA）的討論中，加密貨幣分析師 Steven Schlangenreich 提出了有關這兩個加密貨幣項目及其對比特徵的有趣觀點。 Kaspa 以其真正的去中心化和社區驅動的方式而聞名，與 XRP 的中心化結構以及與傳統金融機構的密切關係形成鮮明對比。

Schlangenreich points out that XRP’s large pre-mine and Ripple Labs’ vast holdings, coupled with the limited role of XRP users in the network’s governance, raise questions about XRP’s alignment with the foundational principles of cryptocurrency.

Schlangenreich 指出，XRP 的大量預挖和 Ripple Labs 的大量持有，加上 XRP 用戶在網路治理中的有限作用，引發了人們對 XRP 是否符合加密貨幣基本原則的質疑。

Highlighting XRP’s centralization, he notes that a small group of insiders, including Ripple, control a majority of the token supply, which stands at 100 billion XRP. In contrast, Kaspa’s launch involved no pre-mining or venture capital, with the community retaining control over the network’s direction and governance.

他強調了 XRP 的中心化，並指出包括 Ripple 在內的一小部分內部人士控制著大部分代幣供應，數量為 1000 億 XRP。相較之下，Kaspa 的發布不涉及預挖礦或風險投資，社區保留對網路方向和治理的控制權。

As Schlangenreich emphasizes, Kaspa’s unique approach to decentralization sets it apart. The project boasts an innovative BlockDAG technology that advances the proof-of-work concept, enhancing speed and scalability without compromising security.

正如 Schlangenreich 所強調的那樣，Kaspa 獨特的去中心化方法使其與眾不同。該專案擁有創新的 BlockDAG 技術，該技術推進了工作量證明概念，在不影響安全性的情況下提高了速度和可擴展性。

Kaspa’s technological framework addresses the blockchain trilemma, aiming to achieve security, decentralization, and scalability simultaneously. Schlangenreich notes that XRP offers faster transactions than traditional banking systems, but Kaspa’s innovation extends beyond mere speed improvements to fundamental architectural advances.

Kaspa 的技術框架解決了區塊鏈的三難困境，旨在同時實現安全性、去中心化和可擴展性。 Schlangenreich 指出，XRP 提供比傳統銀行系統更快的交易速度，但 Kaspa 的創新超越了單純的速度改進，擴展到了基礎架構的進步。

The contrasting strengths of XRP and Kaspa, as highlighted by Schlangenreich, embody a broader debate within the cryptocurrency community. Should the industry prioritize institutional integration and regulatory compliance, as exemplified by XRP? Or should it remain true to its revolutionary roots through projects like Kaspa that emphasize decentralization and technological innovation?

正如 Schlangenreich 所強調的，XRP 和 Kaspa 的對比優勢反映了加密貨幣社群內更廣泛的論點。產業是否應該像 XRP 一樣優先考慮機構整合和監管合規？還是應該透過像 Kaspa 這樣強調權力下放和技術創新的計畫來忠於其革命根源？

This comparison ultimately challenges investors and enthusiasts to consider their vision for cryptocurrency’s future. As Schlangenreich suggests, the choice between XRP and Kaspa reflects a deeper decision about the values and direction of the entire crypto industry.

這種比較最終會促使投資者和愛好者思考他們對加密貨幣未來的願景。正如 Schlangenreich 所言，XRP 和 Kaspa 之間的選擇反映了對整個加密行業的價值觀和方向的更深層次的決定。