Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has once again found himself at the center of a discussion about the future of artificial intelligence. This time, his criticism is directed at the giants of the AI industry, whose ambitions, in his opinion, border on dreams of "world domination." Buterin stated that he does not see a single coherent and realistic plan for managing the transition to artificial superintelligence (ASI). Humanity, according to him, is stuck between two scenarios: "naive" and "naive squared."
The trigger for his statements was a discussion around the predictive scenario "AI 2040," which suggests the emergence of superintelligence by 2040 under almost any development of events. Critics of this scenario, in Buterin's view, naively believe that people will be able to coordinate and stop this process. However, as the developer emphasizes, they themselves do not notice their own naivety, assuming that the transition to ASI will go smoothly and painlessly.
Buterin notes that 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 does not hold up to any criticism. He 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 is living 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 world domination." In his opinion, in a "normal" world, 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 a platform called d/acc, 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.
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," Buterin noted.
He proposed agreeing in advance on a set of triggers signaling that "something serious is happening." As examples, he cited super-pandemics, 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 parties would pre-agree to more seriously consider a slowdown or a pause.
Buterin also addressed the heads of tech giants, suggesting that if he were in the shoes 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 opinion: Buterin's position is a rare example of a rational approach to the discussion about AI. Instead of taking sides, he proposes a mechanism that could work in any scenario. For the crypto community, this is especially valuable: the principles of decentralization and open source that Buterin advocates could become the foundation for building a safe future, regardless of whether the singularity arrives tomorrow or in 20 years.