Vitalik Wrote a Proposal Teaching You How to Stealthily Use AI Large Models

比推Published on 2026-03-13Last updated on 2026-03-13

Abstract

Vitalik Buterin and Ethereum Foundation's AI lead Davide Crapis co-authored a proposal titled "ZK API Usage Credits," which introduces a method for anonymously accessing AI models like ChatGPT using zero-knowledge proofs. Instead of requiring users to register and link personal information, the proposal suggests depositing funds (e.g., 100 USDC) into a smart contract. Users can then generate a zero-knowledge proof to verify they are on an encrypted whitelist and have sufficient balance—without revealing their identity. This approach aims to protect user privacy while preventing abuse. Although still in the research phase and facing skepticism, the proposal reflects Vitalik's broader focus on privacy and Ethereum's potential role in providing a tamper-proof data layer in the AI era, where verification and anonymity may become increasingly critical.

Author: Deep Tide TechFlow

Original Title: Vitalik Wrote a Proposal Teaching You How to Stealthily Use AI Large Models


Everyone is talking about AI, and the crypto space seems much quieter on the timeline.

Meanwhile, ETH has been hovering around 2000 for almost two months. What Vitalik says or does doesn't seem to attract much attention anymore.

However, I recently checked his X (Twitter) and found that AI has influenced more than just us. Over the past month, a significant portion of his posts have been about AI, and they've even reached the level of technical proposals.

Among them, the most noteworthy is a proposal co-authored with Davide Crapis, the AI lead at the Ethereum Foundation, published on ethresear.ch on February 11th, titled "ZK API Usage Credits."

In a nutshell, it's about using zero-knowledge proofs to let you anonymously call AI large models.

Right now, whether you use ChatGPT or call Claude's API, there's only one way to pay:

Register an account, bind an email, bind a credit card.

Every conversation you have, every prompt you send, the platform knows it's from you. What you asked, when you asked it, how many times you asked—all tied to your real identity.

Vitalik and Crapis's proposal offers another path.

  1. The user deposits a sum of money into a smart contract, say 100 USDC.

  2. The contract registers this deposit into an encrypted on-chain list. After that, every time you call the API, you don't need to reveal your identity; you just generate a zero-knowledge proof.

  3. This proof does two things for the service provider: it proves you're on the list, and it proves your balance is sufficient. But the proof itself doesn't reveal which specific entry on the list you are.

The service provider gets paid and can prevent abuse, but never knows who you are.

You can interpret this proposal as Vitalik believing that in the AI era, users shouldn't have to surrender their identity just to use an AI tool.

This proposal is still in the research phase, far from implementation, and large model manufacturers might not agree to such a method. The comments section of the proposal is also full of rebuttals and skepticism, arguing that AI model companies will always find a way to know your real identity.

But the author believes the significance of this proposal isn't entirely about whether it can be implemented.

Privacy is something Vitalik has worked on for a decade. From early support for Tornado Cash to promoting zero-knowledge proofs as a core technical roadmap for Ethereum, this thread has never been broken. It's just that in the past few years, privacy in the crypto industry's narrative lacked a big enough story to carry it.

AI has filled that story. When you talk to a large model more than anyone else every day, privacy becomes a real demand.

Vitalik Embraces AI

From February until now, a significant portion of what Vitalik has posted on X has been related to AI, with a density that suggests it's more than just casual chat.

Yesterday he posted a long thread saying he recently attended a cryptography conference where people cared about privacy, cared about open source, cared about censorship resistance... but had no affection for blockchain.

Among that crowd, he conducted a thought experiment:

Forget "we are the Ethereum community," start from scratch and think about where Ethereum is actually most useful.

His conclusion is that Ethereum's most fundamental value is as a bulletin board. A place where anyone can write, anyone can read, and no one can change or delete anything.

In the context of AI, this might be the most important thing Vitalik has said in the last couple of years.

We are entering an era of infinitely cheap generation. Text, images, videos, identities—AI can mass-produce them all. When everything can be forged, what becomes scarce?

These questions ultimately point to the same place: a public, persistent, irreversible data layer. And an unchangeable record is exactly what Ethereum can provide.

Over the past two years, the skepticism Ethereum has faced can be summed up in one sentence: What do you still have that others can't replace?

Looking at it now, Vitalik hasn't answered that question directly.

However, the Ethereum Foundation has done a few low-key things over the past year: formed a 50-person privacy team, established a nearly 50-person privacy research cluster, released the Kohaku privacy framework, specifically appointed an AI lead; the 2026 roadmap lists institutional-grade privacy and faster transaction confirmation as top priorities.

Looking back at his intensive output this month, it's mostly been discussions about Ethereum's privacy and efficiency issues in the context of AI.

I think Vitalik is betting on one thing: the more powerful AI becomes, the more rigid the demand for privacy and verification infrastructure will be. Whether Ethereum can meet this demand is another matter, but he has clearly chosen his table.

ETH is still hovering around 2000. Most people still aren't paying much attention to what he's been saying lately.

But perhaps in a few years, looking back, this might be the time we should have been paying attention.


Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

BitPush TG Discussion Group:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

BitPush TG Subscription: https://t.me/bitpush

Original link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7619566

Related Questions

QWhat is the main idea of Vitalik Buterin's proposal 'ZK API Usage Credits'?

AThe main idea is to use zero-knowledge proofs to allow users to anonymously call AI large language model APIs. Users deposit funds into a smart contract, which registers them on an encrypted on-chain list. They can then generate a zero-knowledge proof to show they are on the list and have sufficient balance without revealing their identity.

QHow does the proposed system protect user privacy when using AI models?

AThe system protects privacy by allowing users to generate a zero-knowledge proof that verifies they are on the approved list and have enough funds, without disclosing which specific user they are. The service provider receives payment and can prevent abuse but never learns the user's identity.

QWhy does Vitalik Buterin believe privacy is crucial in the AI era?

AVitalik believes that as AI becomes more integrated into daily life and people interact more with models than with humans, privacy becomes a genuine and critical need. Users should not have to surrender their identity just to use an AI tool.

QWhat role does Ethereum play in Vitalik's vision for the future?

AVitalik sees Ethereum's core value as providing a public, persistent, and immutable data layer—a bulletin board that anyone can write to and read from, but no one can alter or delete. This becomes essential in an AI era where content and identities can be easily forged, creating demand for verifiable and tamper-proof records.

QWhat actions has the Ethereum Foundation taken recently regarding AI and privacy?

AThe Ethereum Foundation has formed a 50-person privacy team, established a nearly 50-person privacy research cluster, released the Kohaku privacy framework, and appointed an AI lead. Their 2026 roadmap prioritizes institutional-grade privacy and faster transaction confirmations.

Related Reads

Arbitrum Pretends to Be the Hacker, 'Steals' Back the Money Lost by KelpDAO

Title: Arbitrum Poses as Hacker to Recover Stolen Funds from KelpDAO Last week, KelpDAO suffered a hack resulting in nearly $300 million in losses, marking the largest DeFi security incident this year. Approximately 30,765 ETH (worth over $70 million) remained on an Arbitrum address controlled by the attacker. In an unprecedented move, Arbitrum’s Security Council utilized its emergency authority to upgrade the Inbox bridge contract, adding a function that allowed them to impersonate the hacker’s address and initiate a transfer without access to its private key. The council’s action, approved by 9 of its 12 members, moved the stolen ETH to a frozen address in a single transaction before reverting the contract to its original state. The operation was coordinated with law enforcement, which attributed the attack to North Korea’s Lazarus Group. Community reactions are divided: some praise the recovery of funds, while others question the centralization of power, as the council can upgrade core contracts without governance votes. However, such emergency mechanisms are common among major L2s. Despite the partial recovery, over $292 million was stolen in total, with more than $100 million in bad debt on Aave and remaining funds scattered across other chains. The incident highlights escalating security challenges in DeFi, with state-sponsored hackers employing advanced tactics and L2s responding with elevated countermeasures.

marsbit5m ago

Arbitrum Pretends to Be the Hacker, 'Steals' Back the Money Lost by KelpDAO

marsbit5m ago

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

The article "iQiyi Is Too Impatient" discusses the controversy surrounding the Chinese streaming platform IQiyi's recent announcement of an "AI Actor Library" during its 2026 World Conference. IQiyi claimed over 100 actors, including well-known names like Zhang Ruoyun and Yu Hewei, had joined the initiative. CEO Gong Yu suggested AI could enable actors to "star in 14 dramas a year instead of 4" and that "live-action filming might become a world cultural heritage." The announcement quickly sparked backlash. Multiple actors named in the list issued urgent statements denying they had signed any AI-related authorization agreements. This forced IQiyi to clarify that inclusion in the library only indicated a willingness to *consider* AI projects, with separate negotiations required for any specific role. The incident, which trended on social media with hashtags like "IQiyi is crazy," is presented as a sign of the company's growing desperation. Facing intense competition from short-video platforms like Douyin and Kuaishou, as well as Bilibili and Xiaohongshu, IQiyi's financial performance has weakened, with revenues declining for two consecutive years. The author argues that IQiyi is "too impatient" to tell a compelling AI story to reassure the market, especially as it pursues a listing on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The piece concludes by outlining three key "AI questions" IQiyi must answer: defining its role as a tool provider versus a content creator, balancing the "coldness" of AI with the human element audiences desire, and properly managing the interests of platforms, actors, and viewers. The core dilemma is that while AI can reduce costs and increase efficiency, it risks creating homogenized, formulaic content and devaluing human performers.

marsbit58m ago

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

marsbit58m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片