Vitalik Buterin Draws a Clear Line

Users do not have to share their politics, product ideas, or cultural preferences to freely use the decentralized network, says Vitalik Buterin.

Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin said that users do not have to agree with his views on applications, speculation, politics, fixed finance, decentralized social networks, privacy-preserving payments, artificial intelligence, or cultural preferences to use Ethereum.

He believes that disagreeing with him on any issue does not require agreeing or disagreeing on any other.

“Corposlop” Is Not Research

In a lengthy post on X, Buterin said he does not claim to represent the entire Ethereum ecosystem. He described Ethereum as a decentralized protocol built on permissionlessness and censorship resistance, which allows anyone to use the network in any way they choose regardless of their views, the views of the Ethereum Foundation, or those of the Ethereum client developers.

He said that labeling applications he doesn’t like as “corposlop” is not research. According to Buterin, free speech means that people cannot prevent others from working, but are always free to criticize, just as they can be criticized in return.

Buterin said such criticism is necessary and rejects the idea of ​​”neutrality,” where people present themselves as equally open to all opinions while avoiding clearly stated positions. He wrote that neutrality should work in protocols, such as HTTP, Bitcoin, and Ethereum, and within a limited area to certain institutions, but not to individuals, who should instead clearly state their principles, including identifying and criticizing things they believe are inconsistent with those principles, and working with others who share the same principles to build a metaverse where those principles are considered fundamental.

He asserted that principles cannot be limited to the creation of a protocol, while he argued that any principle naturally leads to conclusions not only about how the protocol should be built but also about what it should be built on, and that such principles inevitably go beyond technology to broader social questions, which he said should not be avoided.

Empty Use of “Liberty” in Tech

Buterin added that appreciating concepts such as freedom while considering it appropriate only for technological choices and disconnected from other aspects of life is not realistic but futile. He went on to say that the decentralized protocol should not be considered as part of only one metaverse and that the boundaries of the metaverse are inherently ambiguous, making it common for people to agree on some axes while opposing others.

You may also like:

The latest comments from Ethereum’s founder came a month after he backed the view held by Bitcoin maximalists that concerns about digital sovereignty were well-founded. Buterin then argued that today’s Internet is focused on corporate-controlled systems that erode user power and defined sovereignty as protecting privacy, discretion, and autonomy on profit-driven bases, not just resistance to government.