The ongoing decentralization debate focuses on the XRP Ledger (XRPL) because it serves as the main topic of discussion. Critics claim its “missing” early history proves it was never truly decentralized. David Schwartz, who served as Ripple’s chief technology officer, disputes this statement. He argues that the event which people use as proof of centralization demonstrates the system’s ability to withstand control efforts by multiple entities.

The Bitcoin supporter Bram Kanstein revealed new evidence that proved that public XRPL history starts from Ledger 32,570 instead of Ledger 1. Some people perceive this as an instance of choosing specific information to alter. Schwartz identifies it as a technical defect that they chose to maintain because it would help keep decentralized operations intact.

Also Read: XRPL Adoption by SOIL Creates New Institutional Yield Opportunities

XRP Ledger and the “Missing” Genesis History

The first week of XRP Ledger ledgers contains corrupted headers because a software bug affected the system during its launch in June 2012. The first 32,569 ledgers became inaccessible because of this issue.

The ledger maintained its complete state because all account balances, trust lines, and network conditions at that moment were preserved. The system lost historical records instead of monetary worth. The 32,570 ledger served as the official public starting point for all history servers.

According to Schwartz, centralized decision-making did not create this particular outcome. The network chose to proceed without taking any action because it did not want to initiate a rollback or rewrite historical events. He believes that the system achieved decentralization because it maintained its current state without making changes.

XRP Ledger vs Bitcoin: Centralization Comparison

Schwartz used the current incident to demonstrate his argument by showing its similarities to Bitcoin’s history which includes times when people intervened. He cited the 2010 value overflow bug, one of the most serious flaws ever discovered in Bitcoin.

The stakeholders of the system worked together to implement a system rollback, which fixed an exploit that had generated billions of false currency units. The needed fix showed a mostly disregarded truth, which demonstrated that all Bitcoin systems need human intervention for their operation during emergency situations.

Schwartz established his position. The XRP Ledger operated independently of centralized power to change its historical records. The system chose to maintain its historical records, which created permanent gaps instead of pursuing complete control over its past.

The debate ultimately raises a deeper question. Is decentralization defined by who can intervene, or by who chooses not to? The imperfect genesis of the XRPL system demonstrates decentralized governance through its permanent record, which shows all system changes.

Also Read: XRP Holds Top-5 Spot as U.S. ETFs Hit $1 Billion and XRPL Activity Stays Flat

---

Filed under: Bitcoin - @ February 10, 2026 9:08 am