Vitalik Buterin: AI 2040 is Completely Incompatible with Opponents' Worldview
Vitalik Buterin stated that AI 2040 and opponents are trapped in completely incompatible worldviews regarding the speed and significance of AI advancements: the former presupposes the emergence of superintelligence before 2040 in almost all scenarios, while the latter assumes that the transition to ASI will be smooth and natural.
He mentioned that if AI is confirmed as an ordinary technology, he would support the opposition; if superintelligence is assumed to emerge by 2030, he would align more closely with the AI 2040 camp. Currently, there is high uncertainty, hence continued support for d/acc (defensive acceleration) and openness to slow or pause options.
Market Mechanism: d/acc holds value under both worldviews, promoting formal verification, cryptography, and open-source hardware as defensive technologies; attention shifts towards non-centralized power paths under event-driven circumstances, benefiting Ethereum and the crypto ecosystem from the reinforcement of the d/acc narrative, while traditional AI companies face pressure from centralized control narratives.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
Vitalik has long advocated for d/acc as a defensive path at the intersection of crypto and AI, previously emphasizing Ethereum's role in decentralized AI coordination. His public comments on the AI 2040 report continue his middle-ground stance in the debate on AI acceleration and safety.
In terms of capital pathways, he directs resources towards formal verification, secure hardware, and biological defenses by supporting d/acc, motivated by the aim to reduce the risk of power concentration regardless of whether AI is an ordinary technology or a rapidly emerging superintelligence, while enhancing Ethereum's positioning as public infrastructure.
Similar to Hanson’s contract prediction mechanism or the concept of mutually assured destruction during the nuclear age, this move shows that Vitalik currently occupies a bridging position in the discourse on AI risks, attempting to achieve win-win coordination through pre-set triggering conditions.
Structural Judgment: Essentially, this is a confrontation between regulatory changes and capital concentration. The controversy over the speed of AI advancements reconstructs the logic of power distribution, with mechanisms determining whether to accept pauses or mandatory open-sourcing based on different worldviews. d/acc buffers the two extreme paths by enhancing defensive capabilities, avoiding a scenario where a single large model or state dominance leads to a zero-sum outcome in hard power.
ABAB News · Law of Cognition
- When worldviews are incompatible, pre-set triggers are the only executable protocol.
- Defensive acceleration is valuable in any future, while offensive acceleration is only valuable in a single future.
- In the face of superintelligence, power concentration is an accelerator for the zeroing out of hard power.