Ripple CTO’s Fee Proposal Leaves Blockchain World Gasping (And Possibly Richer) 😮💸

by

In a scene not unlike the sort of impromptu salon one finds in the less fashionable corners of Mayfair, Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, took to X for what can only be described as an outpouring of technical soul-searching. Surrounded—virtually—by developers, would-be economists, and those peculiar creatures known as “protocol theorists,” Mr. Schwartz laid bare his designs for improving the XRP Ledger’s baffling fee system, waving notions of “fairness” and “efficiency” as one might a crumpled promissory note at the club.

At present, the XRP Ledger’s fees operate on that timeless principle: you pay to play, and whatever misguided excess you toss into the pot is simply burned to warm the cockles of—well, probably just the validators’ hearts. Since nobody particularly enjoys donating more than absolutely necessary (unless one is buying dinner for Lady Metroland), this has naturally led some to question whether the system might not be improved by a touch less arson and a trifle more common sense.

Enter Schwartz’s first brainwave: figure out, after all the dust has settled (consensus achieved, pipes smoked, deals struck), precisely what the lowest successful fee should have been. Then, as a gesture of astonishing modernity, actually refund the unwitting surplus to users—a move almost certain to cause general confusion and bad poetry in shareholder statements.

One idea is to compute the fee level required to get one more transaction into the ledger after the consensus transaction set is determined and rebate any fee above that level that any transaction tried to pay. You might have to tweak that a bit to make it not break consensus.

— David ‘JoelKatz’ Schwartz (@JoelKatz) June 16, 2025

However, there’s a twist worthy of a provincial farce: persuading every validator to agree on this Post-Consensus Oracle Fee—without sending the whole chain into existential crisis—may not be the soothing seaside stroll it sounds. Schwartz, not easily discouraged, hinted that sufficiently sophisticated protocol tweaks might save the day, though with rather less than his usual air of iron-clad commitment. 🦑

Nothing is ever ideal

For his encore, Schwartz suggested a scheme so democratic one can only assume it would make Rousseau weep: simply refund anything paid above the median accepted transaction fee. (If everyone overbids in a fit of civic pride, of course, they are doomed to overpay together—leaving that most British of outcomes: “Room for improvement, but let’s have tea first.”)

“Everyone overpays. That’s not ideal,” Schwartz mused, presumably with a sigh and a glance at the lucrative inefficiencies of the traditional banking sector. The point: let the users write in their maximum, secure in the knowledge that honesty may—UNLIKE IN LIFE—actually pay a dividend.

Is there a roadmap? One assumes the park is being surveyed as we speak. Officially, nothing besides a chorus of polite enthusiasm and speculation. Still, the spectacle of Ripple’s leadership airing out the family silver in public is, in its own way, rather heartening—if only for those with a natural taste for drama, rebates, or blockchain repartee. 🍸

Read More

2025-06-16 13:17