Vitalik Buterin: AI Giants Dream of "World Domination," While Humanity is Stuck Between Two "Naiveties"
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has sharply criticized the largest players in the artificial intelligence industry. In his view, the debate surrounding the transition to artificial superintelligence (ASI) has reached a dead end: humanity is faced with a choice between "naive" and "naive squared" scenarios of development.
The Core of the Dispute: Speed vs. Control
The reason for Buterin's statement was a discussion around the predictive scenario "AI 2040," which assumes the emergence of superintelligence by 2040 under almost any circumstances — except for titanic efforts to completely stop it. Critics of this scenario, according to the developer's observations, call it naive in its assessment of humanity's ability to coordinate. However, they themselves, Buterin claims, show no less naivety in believing that the transition to ASI will go smoothly and by default.
Buterin emphasizes: the critics' position only makes sense in a world where AI remains an "ordinary technology." But in a world where superintelligence is possible as early as 2030, it, in his words, does not hold up to criticism. Vitalik himself admits to uncertainty: if he were confident in at least one of the scenarios, he would join the corresponding camp. For now, he does not understand which world humanity lives in.
Concerns About the Concentration of Power
Separately, Buterin expressed discomfort with the rhetoric of some major AI companies. He is alarmed by the mindset: "open source is bad, and a good outcome is one where our guys gain controlling global dominance." In a "normal" world, he believes, such statements should trigger all political alarm bells simultaneously. Buterin himself views superintelligence as a huge risk of power concentration.
That is why he promotes the d/acc platform, which includes the development of formal verification, cryptography, secure open hardware, pandemic resilience, and public epistemology. The value of these areas is that they are useful in both future scenarios. At the same time, Buterin positively noted that the "AI 2040" plan has become more friendly to open source and even mandates it.
How to Find a Compromise
The key, according to the Ethereum developer, is to find a deal acceptable to both sides. "A winning agreement will be one that both sides accept based on their current beliefs, albeit for different reasons," he noted.
Buterin proposed agreeing in advance on a set of triggers signaling that "something serious is happening." As examples, he cited superpandemics, an unemployment rate above 25%, or the emergence of autonomous weapons. If a sufficient number of such triggers are activated within an agreed timeframe, the sides would agree in advance to seriously consider a slowdown or a pause. According to his idea, critics would accept this, expecting the triggers not to fire, while the concerned would accept it, expecting the opposite.
Separately, Buterin addressed the heads of technology giants. In his words, if he were in the place of Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg, he would restructure social platforms to search for such mutually beneficial deals. However, he admitted that this idea is also naive.
Analyst's Comment: Buterin's position is a rare case where one of the key architects of the crypto industry steps outside his ecosystem and proposes a global framework for managing ASI risks. His idea with triggers is, in essence, an attempt to apply smart contract principles to AI regulation. However, as with DeFi, the key issue remains not the technical implementation, but the ability of warring parties to sit down at the negotiating table.