There has been another warming in recent days in the old discussion about the cost and actual use of the XRP network. The reason for this was that one X platform user had re-referenced a comment on XRP in 2024 and used Forbes ' description of Ripple and XRP visions in the early years to discuss whether their low-cost payment lines had delivered enough real value.

The old post is starting again.

The post reviews Ripple's development and refers to the early vision of XRP by Jed McCaleb, Arthur Britto and David Schwartz to support new payment systems at a faster and lower cost. The post also questions whether the current market value of XRP appears to be high in terms of network costs and chain activity.

Once again, such statements bring out a common debate in the encryption market: whether the higher the fees of the network would mean that users would be more willing to pay for them, thus indicating a stronger ecology.

Schwartz is against the high-cost narrative.

In response, Ripple ' s former Chief Technical Officer, David Schwartz, publicly responded that it was "very strange" to consider higher network costs as a sign of a healthier encrypted ecology. His core view was that low costs should not be treated as weaknesses and that high costs should not automatically be interpreted as stronger network performance.

According to this statement, the low handling cost of XRP is closer to its original design objectives rather than a later problem. One of the early positioning of the XRP is to provide infrastructure for low-cost transfers and payments.

The focus is still operational.

Although the issue that triggered the discussion did not directly negate the XRP, the content focused on an old issue: XRP has developed sufficiently clear actual uses and supports their market value.

The article refers to the tendency of some critics to link higher activity to higher handling fees, thereby questioning the value expression of low-cost networks. In response, Schwartz attempted to bring the discussion back to the efficiency of use itself, i.e. whether low cost could become network competitiveness rather than being seen as a sign of ecological weakness.

At present, this discussion is more at the level of market narratives and asset recognition, and does not involve recent adjustments to the Ripple or XRP network parameters.