Ethereum’s Vitalik Fears Government Power Over Big Tech

Ethereum developer Vitalik Buterin cautions that the greatest danger is held by governmental authority, not Big Tech. His essay, Balance of Power, discusses why decentralization is so essential nowadays.

Vitalik Buterin, the co-founder of Ethereum, published a landmark treatise titled Balance of Power. The 240,000-word manifesto questions technological advancements. Buterin cautions that big government, big business, and big mob are all getting stronger together.

Why Old Power Limits No Longer Work.  

The world was once closed by distance. Geographical barriers were completely destroyed by digital technology. There are no longer coordination issues that limit the size of companies. Everything has transformed when it comes to scale due to automation and AI.

Buterin believes that the ancient beliefs of centuries are no longer relevant in 2025. The new technology threatens the old ways of protection against concentration. He calls the new reality a thick jungle whereby all mighty forces act on never-before-seen levels.

The Math of Dangerous Growth of Power.  

The economies of scale generate geometric growth benefits. A company that doubles its resources performs better. This results in uncontrolled dominance mathematically. Two historical forces offset this trend.

Natural limits were used to be given by diseconomies of scale due to inefficiency. Innovation is naturally disseminated through knowledge sharing amongst competitors. Quick automation means worldwide operation at low costs. Distribution is allowed by proprietary software without transparency.

Organisations implement products on a global scale without exposing technology. This safeguards reverse engineering that was once disseminating innovation. Buterin recognises this as a mathematical inevitability that leads to concentration.

Dangerous Government Merger in Silicon Valley.  

The essay is a fierce critique of the philanthropic change of billionaires. Buterin compares the libertarian technology culture in 2013. Modern direct political involvement is another thing. Executives in Silicon Valley desire state authority.

According to him, this is a blending of two mighty camps. Instead, they are supposed to complement one another. Tech leaders used to be very libertarian. They are now aggressive seekers of governmental power.

This criticism applies to cryptocurrency. The percentage of insider allocation of crypto launches has transformed significantly. They increased from below 10 per cent in the years before 2009 to above 70 per cent consistently by 2021.

Decentralization: The Final Defense of Society.  

Buterin suggests new radical balance mechanisms. Border taxes based on proprietary-related carbon in the form. Intellectual property taxes by Harberger would help. Adversarial interoperability develops products without authorization.

The remedy focuses on the required diffusion plans. They compel dominant players to distribute their abilities or risk being beaten out of the market. EU standardization requirements, such as USB-C, are present. Another example is the technology-transfer regulations in China. The US prohibitions also deal with non-compete contracts. These policies render the company’s knowledge partly open.

You might also like: Iran’s Currency Crisis Sparks Bitcoin Adoption Debate

When Crypto Becomes What It Fought.  

Video games demonstrate the worrying trend that Buterin writes about. They have moved from fulfilment-oriented experiences to slot-machine-like entertainment. Even the prediction markets shifted to governance enhancement in sports betting.

According to Butterin, this soullessness is a result of the big players. They have the same motives of profit maximization. The concentration of power distorts the surrounding environments drastically. This brings about urban sameness and sterility of culture.

The balance-of-power paradigm exposes corporate development. Businesses get aura donors and are uninterested at the same time. Large companies are motivated by common motives. Profit maximization is their primary goal at the expense of society.

Lido Shows Decentralization the Right Way.  

Buterin provides the example of Lido by Ethereum. There are two staking pools; the decentralized pool manages 24% of staked ETH. The platform circumvents any centralization apprehensions with internal architecture. Dozens of operators offer distributed control.

Dual governance provides a veto power over decisions by stakeholders. Buterin attributes much decentralization to Lido. The Ethereum community does not believe in the dominance of one side. This helps to avoid a dangerous concentration of the total stake.

His pluralist morality has definite limits. There is no situation where actors are hegemonic. Instead, advisors encourage them to be influential.The empowerment of others becomes the main objective.

Defensive Technology Not under Centralized Control.  

The essay praises the concept of d/acc as a complementary strategy. Pluralism is safer because of defensive acceleration. Defensive technology is being developed in line with offensive technology. It is open and accessible at the same time.

This minimises the necessity of concentrating power to protect. One example of defence is zero-knowledge proofs. Decentralized exchanges offer another viable solution. These technologies consist of adversarial interoperability tools.

Buterin differentiates between two kinds of power. Power empowers action, construction and influence. Power expresses control and dominance. This combination is the synthesis between slave morality and the morality of the masters.

The manifesto dismisses the helpless world theory. That fear indicates that technological development emboldens the destructive players. It asserts the necessity of concentrating preemptive power. Buterin claims that distributed defensive technology generates security.

His vision requires projects to formulate precise decentralization models. These have to co-exist with business models. They formally restrain excessive power. Good intentions cannot avoid concentration risks.