AI Will Destroy Cryptocurrency? Vitalik: Don't Panic, 90% of My Net Worth Is My Bet

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-09-08Востаннє оновлено о 2026-09-08

Анотація

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has publicly countered a prediction that AI will cause Bitcoin's price to crash by over 50% within two years. The debate originated from AI risk commentator Liron Shapiro, who argued that AI could erode trust in Bitcoin's network security, even without breaking its core cryptography. Buterin remains optimistic about long-term network security, stating that issues not requiring full social consensus for fixes—like attacks on clients, mining pools, or infrastructure—are manageable. He believes AI is highly unlikely to compromise Bitcoin's underlying proof-of-work or hash functions, noting his personal stake aligns with this view as roughly 90% of his wealth is in crypto. The discussion highlights a key market divergence on AI's impact. Shapiro's point is that exposing critical security weaknesses in surrounding ecosystem elements (wallets, bridges, exchanges, smart contracts) could severely damage market confidence, even if Bitcoin's core remains intact. Real-world incidents, like the AI-driven automated attacks that forced Boltz to halt operations, demonstrate such threats are already testing crypto defenses. Security experts warn AI-powered smart contract exploits could lead to billions in losses. The broader tech and crypto industries are now in an arms race to develop defensive AI tools that can keep pace with offensive capabilities. Initiatives like Anthropic's Glasswing project, involving major firms, aim to proactively find and patc...

Written by: Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Compiled by: Chopper, Foresight News

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has publicly refuted a claim predicting that artificial intelligence will cause Bitcoin's price to plummet by over 50% within two years.

The debate originated from Silicon Valley investor and AI risk commentator Liron Shapiro's assessment. He believes there is a 50% probability that Bitcoin will fall more than 50% in the next two years, reasoning that AI will undermine investor confidence in the security and robustness of Bitcoin's network.

However, Vitalik holds the opposite view. He posted on platform X, stating: "My core argument is that I'm optimistic about long-term network security; the real challenge is the transition."

Vitalik argued that Bitcoin can handle security failures that don't require broad social consensus to fix, including attacks on clients, mining pools, and other network infrastructure. He believes it's nearly impossible for AI to fundamentally break Bitcoin's hash functions or proof-of-work mechanism.

He mentioned he would have been willing to make a bet on this view with Shapiro, and his current crypto holdings already represent about 90% of his net worth. He added that this logic also applies to Ethereum.

This disagreement highlights a significant market divide: what impact will increasingly capable AI systems actually have on the cryptocurrency market?

Shapiro's argument doesn't require AI to crack Bitcoin's underlying cryptographic algorithms. Even if developers eventually patch vulnerabilities, a large-scale attack exposing security weaknesses once considered very difficult to exploit could be enough to damage market confidence.

AI Attacks Are Already Testing Crypto Defenses

Real-world cases across the crypto industry prove that the threats Shapiro warned about are already here; hackers don't need to break Bitcoin's underlying cryptography to create risks.

In August this year, Boltz indefinitely suspended its service after months of automated AI scanning attacks. A series of controlled security breaches occurred in succession, with small development teams unable to patch vulnerabilities as fast as the attacks evolved.

Boltz stated its non-custodial architecture protected user funds, but the company absorbed the losses from the attacks and ultimately concluded the business could not operate safely.

This incident confirms that AI can pressure Bitcoin's peripheral infrastructure without destroying the proof-of-work mechanism or breaking the underlying cryptographic system. Attackers rely on automated tools to find vulnerabilities en masse, far outpacing defenders' ability to identify, fix, and deploy patches.

Security industry executives predict these threats will proliferate as offensive AI capabilities continue to advance.

Deddy David, CEO of blockchain security firm Cyvers, previously told CryptoSlate that AI-powered smart contract attacks could ultimately cause economic losses reaching hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars.

"If AI can uncover vulnerabilities in the core infrastructure of the internet at scale, the crypto market will feel the impact first," David said.

Wallets, cross-chain bridges, exchanges, smart contracts, and the software running blockchain networks are all at risk. Compared to Bitcoin's consensus mechanism itself, these systems offer attackers many more entry points.

This is also the crux of the disagreement between Vitalik and Shapiro: AI doesn't need to crack the SHA-256 hash algorithm to inflict serious damage on the entire Bitcoin economic ecosystem.

The unresolved core question is whether these attacks can be managed through upgrades and stronger defenses as Vitalik expects, or whether they will ultimately severely shake the security assumptions underpinning investors' valuation of Bitcoin.

Crypto and Tech Giants Race to Deploy AI Defense Capabilities

The entire tech industry is engaged in an arms race to ensure defensive AI evolves at least as fast as offensive AI.

Anthropic restricted public access to one of its models because it could autonomously find software vulnerabilities and turn them into weapons. The company instead channels this capability to defenders through Project Glasswing, which involves tech and financial institutions like Amazon Web Services, Google, Microsoft, and JPMorgan Chase.

This project uses Mythos Preview to identify and fix critical system vulnerabilities before malicious actors can exploit them using similar AI tools. Anthropic has committed up to $100 million in computing credits to support the initiative.

Participants in the defensive effort extend far beyond single companies. Over 100 organizations, including Google, Microsoft, Anthropic, and OpenAI, have co-signed an open letter warning governments and businesses that AI-powered cyberattacks will become significantly more common and sophisticated within months.

Banks, payment giants, and tech firms like Capital One, Mastercard, Visa, Adobe, Oracle, and IBM also joined the call. They argue that as AI capabilities grow, current cybersecurity defenses will be insufficient, leaving under-resourced critical infrastructure even more vulnerable. They urge governments and tech companies to provide advanced defensive AI tools and security testing services to institutions like hospitals and water facilities.

The crypto industry is also part of this race and faces an added challenge: many of its systems host instantly transferable financial assets, and the entire infrastructure runs transparently and around the clock.

Therefore, the debate between Vitalik and Shapiro shouldn't be simplistically judged by whether "AI can destroy Bitcoin." A more pressing issue is whether attackers will gain a decisive advantage before defensive tools, audit standards, and network infrastructure can catch up.

Пов'язані питання

QAccording to the article, why does Vitalik Buterin disagree with the prediction that AI will cause Bitcoin's price to crash by over 50%?

AVitalik Buterin disagrees because he is optimistic about network security in the long term. He believes the main challenge is managing the transition and that AI cannot fundamentally compromise Bitcoin's hash function and proof-of-work mechanism.

QWhat is Liron Shapiro's main argument about how AI could threaten the cryptocurrency market, as mentioned in the article?

ALiron Shapiro's main argument is that AI could undermine investor confidence in the security and robustness of cryptocurrencies by exposing and exploiting vulnerabilities in their surrounding infrastructure, even without breaking the core cryptographic algorithms.

QWhat real-world example from the article illustrates the threat of AI-powered attacks on crypto infrastructure?

AThe article cites the example of Boltz, which suspended its operations indefinitely in August after facing months of automated AI scanning attacks. These attacks targeted vulnerabilities faster than the small development team could patch them.

QAccording to the article, how is the wider tech industry responding to the threat of offensive AI tools?

AThe wider tech industry is engaged in an arms race to develop defensive AI. Initiatives like Anthropic's Glasswing project involve major companies like AWS, Google, and Microsoft. Over 100 organizations have also signed an open letter warning governments and businesses about the increasing prevalence of sophisticated AI-powered cyber attacks.

QWhat is the central, unresolved question at the heart of the debate between Vitalik Buterin and Liron Shapiro, as presented in the article?

AThe central, unresolved question is whether AI-powered attacks can be effectively managed and mitigated through upgrades and stronger defenses, as Vitalik believes, or if they will severely shake the security assumptions that underpin investor confidence and pricing for assets like Bitcoin.

Пов'язані матеріали

MIT Professor Despairs: OpenAI's Solution to Millennium Problem Is Beyond Human Comprehension

MIT professor expresses despair as AI solves a Millennium Prize Problem with proof humans struggle to comprehend. OpenAI reportedly published 722 papers tackling long-standing mathematical challenges, including the Navier-Stokes equations, a fundamental problem in fluid dynamics concerning whether smooth solutions can become turbulent ("blow up"). While a Spanish mathematical team had largely constructed the framework, OpenAI's model allegedly completed the final, extremely complex 1%, producing a valid proof. The breakthrough, however, has triggered profound anxiety. Experts, including MIT's Justin Solomon, find the proof dense, technically overwhelming, and lacking the intuitive elegance of human-derived mathematics. This represents an unprecedented split between "truth" and "human understanding," challenging centuries of scientific tradition. The incident highlights broader concerns about AI's role in science. Fields Medalist Terence Tao proposed a thought experiment: would we use an AI-generated, 100% effective cancer drug if no human could understand *why* it works? This underscores critical issues in AI alignment, explainability, and verification. Furthermore, the academic system is buckling under an AI-generated deluge of papers, making peer review nearly impossible. There are fears that future scientific breakthroughs will depend more on computational resources (GPUs, tokens) than human insight, potentially marginalizing traditional researchers. Despite AI's brute-force prowess within the "convex hull" of existing knowledge, Solomon argues that truly original, paradigm-shifting concepts likely still require human creativity. In an era where generating answers is cheap but verification and deep understanding are not, foundational education in mathematics and critical thinking remains essential. Humans may transition from being primary solvers to becoming the essential interpreters and validators of AI-discovered truths.

marsbit40 хв тому

MIT Professor Despairs: OpenAI's Solution to Millennium Problem Is Beyond Human Comprehension

marsbit40 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片