THORChain cofounder argues protocol is more decentralized than Bitcoin and Ethereum

THORChain’s co-founder wants you to rethink what decentralization actually means. His case: a handful of operators could halt THORChain, but even fewer parties could stop Bitcoin or Ethereum. Chad Barraford, THORChain’s co-founder and lead developer, made that argument in October 2026. It’s a bold claim to make about the two largest blockchains, especially while your own protocol is taking heat over a hack. The fight over who gets to say no The debate flared back up after Bitget suffered a hack in September 2026. The estimated loss sits at $387.5 million. THORChain then declined to intervene on funds linked to the hackers. That refusal is the source of most of the criticism. Barraford’s defense rests on neutrality. In his view, THORChain cannot pick and choose which transactions to block, any more than Bitcoin or Ethereum can. So who actually makes decisions on THORChain? According to Barraford, governance is collective. Validators vote, and most changes require approval from two-thirds of nodes. Why critics aren’t convinced The pushback centers on how THORChain is built. The protocol uses a threshold signature scheme, or TSS, to control funds. Critics argue that collective custody...