A Stanford University professor who is on Ripple’s board of directors has been accused of praising the cryptocurrency while slamming rival Bitcoin in a presentation.
Student Conner Brown recently attended a presentation about crypto by Professor Susan Athey and claims she misinformed students about Bitcoin while also promoting Ripple.
Professor Athey joined Ripple Lab’s board of directors in 2014.
Brown claims he took his concerns to his professors, but they would not talk to him in person.
He then sent an email to Stanford professors and claims that too has been ignored.
Coin Rivet has reached out to Professor Athey for a comment.
Brown has now taken to Twitter to air his misgivings.
He claims Professor Athey said Bitcoin is “controlled by a small group of miners in China” and is not secured cryptographically but economically.
He said: “She argued that mining means your funds are only secured by profits of miners.
“She went on to claim that Ripple has solved this problem by removing miners from the picture.”
Brown inquired into why Ripple sells its token to retail investors if the token is supposed to be used for bank liquidity. Professor Athey reportedly responded by stating Ripple “routinely disburse the token” while denying Brown’s comment.
Many in the crypto community praised Brown’s actions.
Notably, Riccardo Spagni – lead developer at Monero – thanked Brown.
Thank you for having Bitcoin’s back!!
— Riccardo Spagni (@fluffypony) February 24, 2019
Another Twitter user, Calvin Chu, wrote: “I heard her speak last year at uchicago and also mentioned some Ripple comments at the time which I though were questionable.”
Very well written points. i heard her speak last year at uchicago and also mentioned some ripple comments at the time which I thought were questionable. Thank you for speaking up.
— Calvin Chu (@radicalvin) February 24, 2019
Meanwhile, Alex Magnus suggested that Professor Athey holds an equity position in Ripple.
.@Susan_Athey holds an equity position in @Ripple, and is using her position @stanford to mislead students with deliberately false information. Why is this not a bigger deal?! Good job man, hopefully this comes to light.
— Alex Magnus (@alexmagnusBTC) February 24, 2019
While an overwhelming majority are in Brown’s corner, some were quick to pick up that his own responses might not necessarily be correct. Several people got involved and posted their own thoughts.
Agree w everything you said except your first and last points:
1. $BTC mining is indeed centralized, and a 51% attack works by changing node’s decisions regarding validity of tx’s
2. If you enter the wrong $BTC address, it’s gone. Fact. QR’s are great but that wasn’t a lie.
— David Goosenberg (@dg3984a) February 25, 2019
Interested in reading more about crypto at university level? Discover how MIT and Stanford academics are teaming up to deliver a cutting-edge cryptocurrency.