Vitalik: What We Need to Do Is Not Fight AI, But Create Sanctuaries

marsbitPublished on 2026-05-18Last updated on 2026-05-18

Abstract

Vitalik Buterin, in an a16z podcast, addresses the core challenge of the AI era: not to fight AI, but to build "sanctuary technologies" that protect humans without stripping away privacy and agency. He argues the greatest risk is not super-intelligent AI, but humans becoming passive passengers who outsource decisions to centralized systems and AI, leading to a disempowering safety. He redefines Ethereum/crypto's mission as creating such a sanctuary—a parallel, optional space for free coordination, not a fix for the existing system. This becomes crucial as AI and corporate power centralize. Reflecting on his journey from a 19-year-old on "autopilot" to an active "pilot," Vitalik emphasizes that the world reinvents itself every 5-10 years, demanding proactive adaptation. He stresses that active learning is 10x more effective than passive learning, even with equal time. His key advice is to intentionally maintain "manual mode" amidst powerful AI: do tasks yourself, engage in active learning, and avoid total cognitive outsourcing to prevent mental atrophy. For builders, the focus should be on creating tools that preserve human sovereignty, foster serendipity, and keep strategic control. In summary, the AI era demands greater human initiative. True value lies not in computational power, but in active, sovereign individuals who use technology as a tool for agency, not a replacement for it.

Author: Saito

Just finished listening to this episode of Vitalik's podcast on a16z, and it's absolutely packed with insights.

He founded Ethereum at 19, and now in his early 30s, he has shifted from living on "autopilot" to being an "active pilot."

The core topic of this episode is the question we're most anxious about right now: As AI grows increasingly powerful, what should humanity do?

Vitalik's answer is not to "fight AI," but to create sanctuary technologies. These technologies protect us without stripping away our privacy and agency.

Today, I'll break down the hardest counterintuitive points, practical advice, and Ethereum's new positioning from this episode.

The Greatest Risk in the AI Era Is Not AI Being Too Smart, But Humans Being Too Passive

Vitalik states bluntly that the world is less safe and less peaceful now than it was 10 to 15 years ago.

Many people are chasing a kind of "safety": handing everything over to "uncles in the sky"—big companies, super AIs, centralized systems—letting them make decisions, manage risks, and provide protection for us.

But the cost of this safety is the loss of our privacy and agency.

Vitalik calls this safety "disempowering safety"—safety that makes people increasingly powerless.

This is also where he reinterprets the mission of crypto/Ethereum. The significance of Ethereum is not to "fix the dollar" or repair the existing financial system, but to create a new option. You can freely choose to use it or not.

This is what a true sanctuary is: both safe and allowing you to retain sovereignty.

Sanctuary Technologies: Small Spaces That Preserve Human Freedom

Sanctuary Technologies is a term coined by Vitalik himself, and "sanctuary technologies" is a fitting translation.

It's not about turning the entire world into a safe house, nor is it about ruling everyone with a larger system. What it truly aims to do is: give you a safe, small space where you can think, coordinate, and create freely, without being completely controlled by external forces.

It has several core characteristics: not totalizing, not attempting to rule the world; preserving privacy and agency; everyone can freely enter and exit, no coercion.

Ethereum is a typical sanctuary tech. It doesn't try to fix the existing financial system; it gives you a parallel option. Use it if you want, don't if you don't.

This will become increasingly important in the AI era. Because as big companies and super AIs grow stronger, what humanity truly needs is not another system that "arranges everything for you," but spaces that allow you to retain choice.

From Autopilot to Active Pilot: Vitalik's Personal Growth

Reflecting on founding Ethereum at 19, Vitalik says he was largely on autopilot back then.

Many decisions were made by going with the flow: dropping out, writing the whitepaper, getting his visa denied by Ripple, which ironically became a life turning point. He was more like being pushed along by the world then.

But now he increasingly realizes: the world is changing too fast, no one is coming to save you, you must be the pilot yourself.

He gives several relatable examples. Ten years ago, people could go days without contacting friends; now, not replying to a message for a day causes anxiety. Ten years ago, you could genuinely get lost while walking; now, with phone navigation, cities have become a series of "teleportation points."

These changes remind us: the world "dies and is reborn" every 5 to 10 years. If you keep living by the old script, you'll quickly fall behind.

So what's truly important in the AI era is not passively waiting for technology to take you somewhere, but actively deciding how you want to use technology.

The Stronger the AI, the More Humans Need to Stay in "Manual Mode"

Vitalik emphasizes: active learning is 10 times more effective than passive learning, even with the same amount of time spent.

Since childhood, he has forced himself to do many things manually, like doing chemistry without a calculator, walking without navigation. The goal isn't to oppose technology, but to keep the brain engaged.

The stronger the AI, the more we must deliberately preserve some "manual mode."

Sometimes intentionally not using AI to write code, sometimes intentionally walking without navigation, sometimes intentionally not using a chatbot to think through problems for you.

This isn't nostalgia or rejecting efficiency; it's to prevent brain atrophy and maintain one's own agency.

AI can help us with many things, but if all thinking, judgment, and exploration are outsourced, people will gradually become passengers in the system. Vitalik's reminder is: you can use AI, but don't let yourself become utterly dependent on it.

Practical Advice for Builders

The insights Vitalik gives for ordinary builders in this episode are very direct.

First, force yourself to do things manually. Even if AI can help you, do it yourself from time to time to ensure your brain doesn't get rusty.

Second, active learning. Don't just let AI give you answers; derive, verify, and do things yourself.

Third, build sanctuary technologies. Whether you're working on open-source tools, decentralized protocols, or personal knowledge bases, prioritize one thing: does it help people retain sovereignty?

Fourth, don't outsource all brainpower. AI can handle execution, but strategy, direction, and values must be controlled by you.

Fifth, maintain serendipity. Attend more offline events, talk to real people more, don't leave all discoveries to algorithmic recommendations.

These points all point to the same core: the AI era isn't about using fewer tools, but about using tools more actively.

Ethereum's New Positioning: Not Fixing the Old World, But Creating New Options

Vitalik's positioning of crypto is also clear.

Crypto can't solve all the problems of the dollar, nor does it need to pretend it can solve all problems. But it can create something new that doesn't have those flaws.

Everyone can freely choose to use it or not.

This is crypto's greatest strength: it doesn't force you; it gives you a choice.

In an era of increasingly concentrated AI power, this will become increasingly precious. Because as more and more systems try to make decisions for you, filter information for you, and assess risk for you, a parallel, non-coercive option that allows free entry and exit becomes very important in itself.

The value of Ethereum/crypto is not "beating the old world," but giving you a new world you can freely choose.

The Most Counterintuitive Lines from This Episode

The greatest risk in the AI era is not AI replacing humans, but humans willingly turning themselves into passengers.

A sanctuary isn't about making the whole world safe, but giving you a safe, small space where you can still retain freedom.

Active learning is 10 times more effective than passive learning, even with the same time spent.

The world dies and is reborn every 5 to 10 years, and we must be the pilots ourselves.

Inspiration for Ordinary People

The stronger the AI, the more proactive people must be.

Don't outsource all thinking to models. Do more manual things to keep your brain engaged. Participate in building tools that preserve human sovereignty, whether open-source, decentralized, or personal knowledge management systems.

Remember: technology ultimately serves humanity; it doesn't replace it.

Vitalik concludes by saying that we humans are the brightest stars. AI can be strong, but what truly drives the world forward are active, agentic people.

One-Sentence Summary

Vitalik, drawing on his 10 years of personal experience, tells us: the AI era is not an era to lie back, but an era that requires humans to be even more proactive pilots.

Don't outsource your brain to models. Do more manual things, build sanctuary technologies, and preserve your privacy and agency.

My biggest takeaway from this episode is: we used to fear AI taking our jobs, but now it seems AI is actually upgrading humans from "executors" to "designers."

What's truly scarce has never been computing power, but people willing to think actively and retain sovereignty.

Trending Cryptos

Related Questions

QAccording to Vitalik, what is the core purpose of 'Sanctuary Technologies'?

AThe core purpose of 'Sanctuary Technologies' is to provide safe spaces where people can freely think, coordinate, and create while preserving their privacy and agency. They are not designed to dominate or fix the entire world, but to offer a voluntary, non-compulsory alternative, giving people a choice in an era of increasingly centralized power from large corporations and super-AI.

QWhat is the main risk of the 'disempowering safety' that Vitalik warns against in the AI era?

AThe main risk of 'disempowering safety' is that it makes humans increasingly passive and powerless. By handing over decisions, risk management, and protection to centralized entities like big companies or super-AI, individuals lose their privacy and agency. The article argues the biggest danger is not AI being too smart, but humans willingly turning themselves into passive passengers.

QHow does Vitalik's view of Ethereum's mission differ from simply 'fixing' the existing financial system?

AVitalik's view is that Ethereum's mission is not to 'fix' the existing financial system (like the US dollar), but to create a new, parallel option. Its power lies in giving people the freedom to choose whether to use it or not, offering an alternative without the flaws of the old system. This approach of providing voluntary choice, rather than enforced replacement, is its key strength.

QWhat practical advice does Vitalik offer for builders and individuals to maintain agency in the AI age?

AVitalik offers several practical pieces of advice: 1) Force yourself to do things manually at times to keep your mind sharp. 2) Engage in active learning (self-driven exploration) rather than just passively accepting AI answers. 3) Build tools that prioritize preserving human sovereignty. 4) Do not outsource all strategic and creative thinking to AI. 5) Maintain serendipity through real-world interactions.

QWhat does Vitalik mean by saying 'the world dies and gets reborn every 5 to 10 years' and its implication for individuals?

AVitalik means that the world undergoes fundamental transformations every 5-10 years, making old patterns of living obsolete. The implication for individuals is that they cannot rely on an old 'script' or be passive. To keep up and thrive, people must actively 'pilot' their own lives, make conscious choices about how to use technology, and continuously adapt, rather than being passively carried along by change.

Related Reads

From Gold to Bitcoin: Fixed Supply + Institutional Frenzy, Might It Repeat the 'Explosive' Price Trend?

"From Gold to Bitcoin: Fixed Supply and Institutional Frenzy May Lead to 'Explosive' Price Rally Analysts suggest Bitcoin's price action could mirror gold's over the past two decades, following the launch of spot Bitcoin ETFs. Gold ETFs, introduced in 2004, drove gold's price surge to a current market cap near $28 trillion. Both gold and Bitcoin are non-yielding stores of value, with prices driven purely by investor sentiment rather than cash flows or credit. Gold ETFs experienced dramatic cycles: explosive growth, painful drawdowns, and slow recoveries, with each cycle reaching higher peaks. Bitcoin ETFs, approved in early 2024, saw rapid institutional adoption but are now facing similar volatility. Recent warnings highlight the risk of significant ETF outflows disrupting the current rebound. BlackRock's IBIT, a leading Bitcoin ETF, has sold nearly 100,000 BTC to meet redemptions while still holding over 733,000. The core parallel is fixed supply: when demand surges, prices explode, but demand is often volatile and wave-like, not steady. Institutional interest, through ETFs and corporate adoption, remains a key support pillar, helping to cushion sell-offs. If Bitcoin captures even a fraction of gold's role as a store of value, its upside potential is immense, though the path will be marked by high volatility. For investors, focusing on long-term trends and managing risk is crucial as this 'price explosion' narrative unfolds."

Foresight News17m ago

From Gold to Bitcoin: Fixed Supply + Institutional Frenzy, Might It Repeat the 'Explosive' Price Trend?

Foresight News17m ago

Why Is AI Agent Shopping Hard to Popularize?

The article argues that the popular narrative of "AI agent shopping" – equipping AI with a wallet to autonomously handle purchases – is fundamentally flawed and oversimplifies the complexity of shopping. It deconstructs shopping into two core actions: **information retrieval** (standardized, easily automated) and **value judgment** (deeply subjective and human-centric). The narrative mistakenly assumes AI can fully handle both. Value judgment itself has two layers: **evaluation** (assessing options against criteria) and **demand definition** (setting the criteria, weights, and values). The latter is inherently human and dynamic, as preferences are not fixed but constructed during the decision-making process ("constructive preferences"). The real dividing line for automation is not product standardization, but whether the **act of choosing** itself holds experiential value. For mundane purchases (e.g., printer paper), full AI delegation works. For experiential goods (e.g., wine, furniture), the joy of selection is core to consumption, so AI should act as an assistant that narrows options, leaving the final choice to humans. The "AI wallet" concept confuses three separate elements: decision-making, execution, and fund custody. Current payment industry solutions (e.g., from Stripe, Mastercard, Google, Visa) show that limited, scoped payment authorization tokens are sufficient for most consumer scenarios, not full fund custody. The true use case for autonomous AI wallets is in **B2B procurement** and **machine-to-machine (M2M) settlements** for standardized, high-frequency, low-value transactions. The real bottlenecks for AI shopping are not payment technology, but **1) the lack of trusted data sources** (e.g., fake reviews, counterfeit goods) and **2) the impossibility of automating human demand definition**. The conclusion is that the focus should be on safely automating the assessment and filtering process while reserving for humans the rights to define their criteria and enjoy the final act of choice. For experiential goods, the platform's competitive advantage shifts to providing a superior selection experience.

Foresight News1h ago

Why Is AI Agent Shopping Hard to Popularize?

Foresight News1h ago

After Nine Months of Shorting, a Full Turn to Long: Renowned Trader Opens Bitcoin Positions Around 64K, Crypto Market Long-Short Divergence Intensifies

After nine months of being short, prominent crypto trader Doctor Profit has closed all his bearish positions and started buying Bitcoin near $64,000, signaling a complete bullish reversal. He argues that structural market changes—such as impending U.S. regulation (CLARITY Act) and institutional adoption via securities tokenization—are rewriting the traditional four-year cycle script, potentially bringing the market bottom forward from the widely expected September/October timeframe. This view finds some technical support from on-chain analyst gumsays, who notes a bullish divergence on Bitcoin's weekly chart has persisted for 147 days, nearing the 161-day duration seen before the 2022 cycle low. However, cycle researcher Jake Pahor presents a counter-argument based on historical data. Analyzing patterns since 2014, he identifies three common features of past bear market bottoms: a ~12-month duration from peak to trough, a sustained period of extreme fear (with a proprietary risk score below 20), and the price falling below Bitcoin's realized price (~$53,000 currently). The current cycle, only nine months from its October 2025 peak, meets none of these conditions. The debate highlights a market torn between "front-running" a potential early bottom driven by new fundamentals and waiting for confirmation through traditional on-chain and sentiment metrics. While Doctor Profit opts for aggressive buying, Pahor maintains a disciplined, tiered accumulation strategy, continuing weekly buys at current risk levels but reserving larger orders for if more extreme fear emerges.

marsbit1h ago

After Nine Months of Shorting, a Full Turn to Long: Renowned Trader Opens Bitcoin Positions Around 64K, Crypto Market Long-Short Divergence Intensifies

marsbit1h ago

Senior Trader's Confession: How to Trade Market's False Expectations?

Veteran trader's case study: trading the market's "wrong expectations". This trade centered on a textbook "expectation error" after a weak CPI report. While the market initially priced in broad monetary easing (sending Nasdaq to 30,060), the crucial 30-year real yield hit a 20-year high. This signaled a fractured transmission mechanism: short-term rates eased, but long-term funding costs (vital for tech valuations) refused to fall. The trader executed five short positions on the Nasdaq (NQ) as it fell from 30,060 to 28,768. The core methodology: don't just trade the data, but analyze the market's implied causal chain and identify where it breaks. In this case, the chain was: Weak CPI → Policy Easing → Lower Long-Term Funding Costs → NQ Valuation Expansion. The break occurred between policy easing and long-term rates. The "veto variable" – long-term real yields – refused to confirm the bullish narrative. Trades were structured around "fast variables" (price) temporarily repairing while "slow variables" (funding conditions) remained broken. The article outlines a repeatable framework: 1) Map the market's implied causal chain. 2) Identify the veto variable. 3) Observe if it rejects the narrative. 4) Enter when price still follows the old script. 5) Choose the cleanest asset expression (e.g., short NQ, not broad S&P). 6) Define both invalidation and fulfillment exit conditions. The key insight: Alpha often comes not from an information edge, but from a "reaction function edge" – recognizing when the market is applying an outdated causal logic to new data. The critical question: What causal chain is the market's first reaction relying on, and is that chain still valid today?

marsbit2h ago

Senior Trader's Confession: How to Trade Market's False Expectations?

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of AI (AI) are presented below.

活动图片