Vitalik Buterin Slams Web 4.0 Vision: Centralization Risks Exposed

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has dropped a bombshell critique on a futuristic project dubbed “Web 4.0,” calling out its creator, Sigil Wen, for peddling a vision that clashes head-on with the core principles of decentralization. Wen’s bold claim of an AI-driven internet, powered by a self-improving system called “The Automaton,” has been met with a brutal reality check from one of crypto’s most influential voices, raising urgent questions about the intersection of artificial intelligence and blockchain technology.

• Core Clash: Buterin blasts Wen’s Web 4.0 for leaning on centralized AI infrastructure from OpenAI and Anthropic, contradicting its “self-sovereign” hype.
• Danger Zone: He warns of catastrophic risks in excluding humans from AI oversight, pointing to real-world DeFi disasters.
• Bigger Picture: His critique extends to broader blockchain trends like prediction markets, pushing for human-centric innovation over reckless growth.

Wen’s Vision: Web 4.0 Unveiled

On February 17, Sigil Wen, a Thiel Fellow and tech entrepreneur, unveiled “The Automaton,” an AI system he claims can self-improve, replicate, and even sustain itself financially without human input. Through his infrastructure venture, Conway, Wen positions this as the bedrock of Web 4.0—a reimagined internet where AI agents vastly outnumber human users, managing everything from transactions to data flows. Picture a digital realm where machines aren’t just tools but the dominant players, orchestrating a network that operates beyond our direct control. For newcomers, this builds on the evolution from Web 1.0 (static websites) and Web 2.0 (social media) to Web 3.0, which emphasizes blockchain-driven decentralization and user ownership. Web 4.0, in Wen’s view, takes it further with autonomous intelligence at the helm.

The promise is tantalizing: an internet that runs itself, potentially slashing inefficiencies and freeing humans for bigger-picture thinking. Wen suggests “The Automaton” could integrate with blockchain to automate complex tasks like smart contract execution or network scaling, though specifics remain scarce beyond the grand rhetoric. It’s a sci-fi fantasy brought to life—or so he hopes. But before the champagne could pop, Buterin stepped in with a sledgehammer to this shiny dream, as detailed in a recent report on his criticism of AI-driven Web 4.0 concepts.

Buterin’s Critique: Centralization as a Dealbreaker

Buterin didn’t hold back, publicly declaring,

“Bro, this is wrong.”

His beef isn’t just personal; it’s a fundamental rejection of Wen’s project on ideological grounds. The crux of his argument lies in the glaring hypocrisy of claiming “self-sovereign AI”—a system that supposedly operates independently without centralized control—while relying on infrastructure from tech giants like OpenAI and Anthropic. For those new to the space, Ethereum, the blockchain Buterin co-founded, is built on the ethos of decentralization, meaning no single entity like a bank or Big Tech firm holds the reins. Wen’s project, by outsourcing core functions to these centralized players, is, in Buterin’s view, a betrayal of everything crypto stands for.

He put it bluntly:

“You’re actually perpetuating the mentality that centralized trust assumptions can be put in a corner and ignored, the very mentality that Ethereum is at war with.”

Let’s cut the crap: leaning on OpenAI’s servers isn’t sovereignty—it’s surrender. This isn’t just a philosophical quibble. Centralization in any form is a poison pill for blockchain advocates, as it reintroduces the same power imbalances crypto was meant to dismantle. If Web 4.0 is powered by the same overlords we’re trying to escape, what’s the damn point?

Unchecked AI: Real-World Risks

Beyond ideology, Buterin is sounding the alarm on the practical dangers of letting AI run wild without human oversight. He warns that removing humans from AI feedback loops—the process where systems learn and improve by evaluating their actions, ideally with human checks to prevent disasters—could lead to havoc. His words carry weight:

“Once AI becomes powerful enough to be truly dangerous, it’s maximizing the risk of an irreversible anti-human outcome that even you will deeply regret.”

Think of it as a self-driving car with no steering wheel or brakes: slick in theory, catastrophic if it veers off course.

The crypto space has already felt the sting of AI gone wrong. Look at Moonwell, a decentralized finance (DeFi) lending protocol. For the uninitiated, DeFi uses blockchain to build financial systems without traditional banks, often relying on automated code called smart contracts. In Moonwell’s case, AI-generated Solidity code from Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.6 model had a flaw that attackers exploited, draining $1.78 million. The code was meant to manage lending pools, but a logic error left it vulnerable to manipulation, allowing bad actors to siphon funds in a flash. This isn’t an isolated incident—similar DeFi exploits tied to rushed or untested tech have plagued the space. If AI can’t handle a basic contract without bleeding millions, imagine a fully autonomous Web 4.0 system with no guardrails. Skynet, anyone?

Wen’s Defense: Innovation at Any Cost?

To play devil’s advocate, let’s consider Wen’s side. Sure, relying on OpenAI or Anthropic infrastructure reeks of centralization, but isn’t it a necessary stepping stone? Building fully decentralized AI from scratch is a Herculean task, and leveraging existing tech could fast-track innovation. Web 4.0 might deliver real benefits—like optimizing blockchain transaction speeds or slashing costs for DeFi users—if we stomach some compromises early on. Wen could argue that the end justifies the means: an AI-driven internet might solve scalability issues that even Ethereum struggles with, potentially handling millions of transactions per second without breaking a sweat.

But here’s the rub: temporary compromises often become permanent shackles. History in tech shows that once Big Tech embeds itself, it’s damn hard to kick out. And while effective accelerationism—the push to speed up tech progress at all costs—might cheer Wen on, it ignores the collateral damage. A rug pull on decentralization isn’t innovation; it’s regression. The crypto community didn’t fight tooth and nail against financial gatekeepers just to hand the keys to Silicon Valley 2.0.

Broader Blockchain Implications: Beyond Web 4.0

Buterin’s takedown of Web 4.0 isn’t a standalone rant—it’s part of a broader frustration with how blockchain-adjacent tech is veering off course. Take prediction markets, platforms on chains like Ethereum or Polygon where users bet on future events. They could be powerful tools for crowdsourcing truth or forecasting trends, but many have devolved into short-term gambling dens fixated on crypto price swings or sports outcomes. Buterin calls this “corposlop,” a biting jab at profit-driven sludge that prioritizes corporate interests over societal value. His plea is sharp:

“Build the next generation of finance, not corposlop.”

For Bitcoin maximalists like myself, this resonates deeply. Bitcoin’s beauty lies in its simplicity and unyielding focus on sovereignty—a decentralized asset free from speculative bloat. While altcoins like Ethereum drive innovation in areas Bitcoin doesn’t touch, they often wade into messy waters like prediction markets or AI hype. Bitcoin reminds us to keep the mission pure: disrupt the status quo without getting seduced by shiny distractions. Buterin’s critique of Web 4.0 and corposlop echoes this—blockchain should empower, not exploit.

Buterin’s Alternative: Human-Centric Tech

Buterin isn’t just a naysayer; he’s got a vision for how AI and blockchain should merge. He’s warned repeatedly against self-replicating AI systems that sideline humans, stating in January 2025 that such tech risks

“permanent human disempowerment.”

Instead, he champions AI as “mecha suits for the human mind”—tools that amplify our capabilities without replacing us. Think assistive tech that enhances decision-making in DeFi or secures wallets, not autonomous agents running amok.

He’s also wary of blind accelerationism, the rush to push tech growth without steering it. As he noted,

“The exponential will happen regardless of what any of us do, that’s precisely why this era’s primary task is NOT to make the exponential happen even faster, but rather to choose its direction, and avoid collapse into undesirable attractors.”

Translation: speed isn’t the goal; direction is. Blockchain and AI can revolutionize finance and beyond, but only if we prioritize freedom, privacy, and human agency over unchecked hype.

A Fork in the Road

This clash between Buterin and Wen is more than a tech spat—it’s a defining moment for the crypto community. On one path, we chase relentless innovation, flirting with centralized traps and AI disasters in the name of progress. On the other, we double down on decentralization, ensuring tech serves humanity rather than subjugates it. Will Web 4.0 be the next frontier for blockchain, or a gilded cage handed to Big Tech? The stakes couldn’t be higher, and the choice is ours to make—fast.

Key Takeaways and Questions

• What is Web 4.0 according to Sigil Wen?
  It’s a vision of the internet dominated by AI agents like “The Automaton,” which self-improve and operate autonomously, outnumbering human users and redefining digital interaction.
• Why does Vitalik Buterin oppose this concept?
  He rejects it for relying on centralized infrastructure from OpenAI and Anthropic, clashing with decentralization, and warns that excluding human oversight risks disasters humanity can’t undo.
• What real-world risks does unchecked AI pose in blockchain?
  The Moonwell DeFi exploit, where flawed AI-generated code led to a $1.78 million loss, shows how even minor errors in autonomous systems can wreak havoc.
• How does this debate connect to broader blockchain challenges?
  It mirrors tensions between innovation and centralization in sectors like prediction markets, where short-term profiteering often overshadows lasting societal benefit.
• What’s Buterin’s alternative for AI and blockchain integration?
  He pushes for AI as a tool to empower humans, enhancing rather than replacing us, while guiding tech growth with ethical direction over reckless speed.
• Can Web 4.0 ever align with blockchain’s decentralized ethos?
  Only if it sheds Big Tech reliance and embraces open-source, community-driven AI models—otherwise, it’s just a polished trap undermining crypto’s core mission.
• What role should Bitcoin play in debates like this?
  Bitcoin stands as a beacon of simplicity and sovereignty, reminding us to prioritize freedom over flashy tech that risks compromising what crypto stands for.
• Why is human oversight so critical in AI-blockchain systems?
  Without it, errors multiply uncontrollably, as seen in DeFi losses, and powerful AI could spiral into outcomes that permanently sideline human agency.