Can Ethereum Really Power the Future of AI? A Skeptic’s Take on Buterin’s Grand Vision

Vitalik Buterin wants Ethereum to become the backbone of artificial intelligence. The vision is compelling, but is it realistic, or just another crypto narrative in search of a use case?

Vitalik Buterin has never been short on ambition. The Ethereum co-founder recently took to X to revisit a set of ideas he first floated two years ago about how crypto and artificial intelligence should intersect. His argument boils down to this: the breakneck race toward artificial general intelligence is dangerous, and Ethereum could act as the guardrails that keep things from going off the rails.

It’s an attractive pitch. It’s also one that deserves far more scrutiny than it typically receives in the echo chamber of Web3 optimism.

The Pitch: Ethereum as AI Infrastructure

Buterin’s thesis touches on several areas where he believes Ethereum can add value to the AI stack. He talks about privacy-preserving tools that would let users interact with AI models without handing their data to centralized providers. He imagines people running models locally, making anonymous payments for AI services, and using cryptographic techniques to verify that AI systems are behaving as advertised.

Beyond individual users, he paints a picture of AI agents coordinating economically on Ethereum — bots paying other bots, posting security deposits, building on-chain reputations, and resolving disputes without any single entity pulling the strings. Pair that with AI-assisted decentralized governance, and you’ve got a vision of Ethereum as the operating system for a fairer, more transparent AI-powered world.

Sounds great on paper. But paper is patient.

The Scalability Problem Nobody Wants to Talk About

Here’s the uncomfortable reality: Ethereum still struggles with its existing workload. Gas fees spike during periods of heavy usage. Transaction throughput, even with Layer 2 solutions, remains a fraction of what centralized systems handle effortlessly. And we’re supposed to believe this network can serve as the economic coordination layer for millions of AI agents making real-time microtransactions?

AI workloads are computationally intense. Training a single large language model can consume more electricity than a small country uses in a year. The notion that blockchain — a technology whose core design deliberately sacrifices efficiency for decentralization — can meaningfully contribute to this space requires a leap of faith that goes well beyond technical optimism.

Buterin himself recently issued a blunt reality check to other networks, telling them they were “not scaling Ethereum.” The irony is that this critique applies equally to his own AI ambitions. If Ethereum cannot yet scale for DeFi and NFTs without friction, adding AI coordination to the mix seems premature at best.

Privacy Tools: Promising but Unproven

The privacy angle is perhaps the strongest part of Buterin’s argument. There is genuine demand for ways to use AI services without surrendering personal data to tech giants. Zero-knowledge proofs and other cryptographic methods could theoretically enable this — allowing users to verify AI outputs without exposing inputs.

But “theoretically” is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence. The practical implementations of these technologies remain clunky, expensive, and limited in scope. Running complex AI models inside privacy-preserving computation frameworks adds enormous overhead. We are years, possibly a decade away from these tools being efficient enough for mainstream adoption.

Meanwhile, centralized AI providers are racing ahead with user-friendly products that billions of people already use daily. The gap between what crypto-native privacy tools can offer and what OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic deliver today is not shrinking. It’s widening.

Bots Paying Bots: A Solution Looking for a Problem?

The idea of AI agents transacting autonomously on Ethereum is intellectually fascinating. In theory, a decentralized marketplace where AI systems can hire each other, post collateral, and build trust scores without human intermediaries could unlock new forms of machine-to-machine commerce.

In practice, we need to ask why would AI developers choose Ethereum for this when faster, cheaper alternatives exist? Traditional payment rails, APIs with built-in escrow, and centralized orchestration platforms already handle machine-to-machine payments with far less friction. The decentralization premium Ethereum charges—in speed, cost, and complexity—needs to be justified by real benefits that users actually value.

So far, the killer use case for on-chain AI coordination has not materialized. What we have instead are demos, proofs of concept, and a lot of conference talks. While that’s not nothing, it’s also not the foundation on which to stake Ethereum’s relevance in the AI era.

The Governance Fantasy

Perhaps the most ambitious and least convincing part of Buterin’s vision is the idea that AI tools could finally make decentralized governance work at scale. DAOs have been around for years now, and their track record is mixed at best. Voter apathy, plutocratic voting structures, and governance attacks have plagued virtually every major DAO experiment.

Adding AI to this mix might help with information processing and decision support, but it doesn’t solve the fundamental human problems that make governance hard. People disagree. Incentives conflict. Power corrupts. No amount of smart contracts or AI analysis changes the messy reality of collective decision-making.

What Buterin Gets Right

To be fair, Buterin’s broader point deserves acknowledgment. The headlong rush toward AGI by a handful of well-funded companies, with minimal public oversight and enormous concentration of power, is genuinely concerning. His call to “choose a positive direction rather than embracing undifferentiated acceleration” is thoughtful and important.

The question is whether Ethereum is the right vehicle for that counterbalance. Buterin clearly believes it is. But believing something and building something are different activities, and the gap between Ethereum’s current capabilities and the future he describes remains vast.

The Bottom Line

Vitalik Buterin is one of the sharpest minds in the blockchain space, and his instinct to question the trajectory of AI development is sound. But instinct isn’t infrastructure. Ethereum’s real contributions to AI — if they come at all — are likely to be narrow and specialized rather than foundational.

The danger for the Ethereum community is falling into the same trap that has plagued crypto repeatedly: declaring victory before the battle has begun, mistaking a whiteboard sketch for a product, and confusing philosophical alignment with technical readiness.

Ethereum may yet find meaningful niches at the intersection of blockchain and AI. But the idea that it will serve as the backbone of how humanity navigates the age of artificial intelligence? That’s not a roadmap. That’s a wish.

 

This article reflects the author’s analysis and opinion. It does not constitute investment or technology advice.

Blockcritics Alerts / Sign-up to get alerts on hackathons, new products, apps, contracts, protocols and breakthroughs in web 3.0.