Vitalik Buterin

Plurality philosophy in an incredibly oversized nutshell

2024 Aug 21

(From https://vitalik.eth.limo/general/2024/08/21/plurality.html)

One of the interesting tensions in the crypto space, which has become a sort of digital home for my geographically nomadic self over the last decade, is its relationship to the topic of governance. The crypto space hails from the cypherpunk movement, which values independence from external constraints often imposed by ruthless and power-hungry politicians and corporations, and has for a long time built technologies like torrent networks and encrypted messaging to achieve these ends. With newer ideas like blockchains, cryptocurrencies and DAOs, however, there is an important shift: these newer constructions are long-lived, and constantly evolving, and so they have an inherent need to build their own governance, and not just circumvent the governance of unwanted outsiders. The ongoing survival of these structures depends crucially on mathematical research, open source software, and other large-scale public goods. This requires a shift in mentality: the ideology that maintains the crypto space needs to transcend the ideology that created it.

These kinds of complex interplays between coordination and freedom, especially in the context of newer technologies, are everywhere in our modern society, going far beyond blockchains and cryptocurrency. Earlier this year, Florida governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill that would ban synthetic (aka lab-grown) meat from the state, arguing that global elites want to control our behavior and push a diet of petri dish meat and bugs on Americans, and that we need to prioritize our farmers and ranchers over ... the World Economic Forum. As you might expect, the Libertarian Party New Hampshire account publicly criticized the authoritarian socialist nature of the legislation. But as it turned out, many other self-described libertarians did not share the same opinion:

To me, LPNH's criticism of DeSantis's ban makes total sense: banning people from eating a new and potentially far more ethical and sustainable form of meat, on the basis of little more than a disgust reflex, is the exact opposite of valuing freedom. And yet, it's clear that many others do not feel the same way. When I scoured the internet for cogent arguments why, the most compelling I could find is this argument from Roko Mijic: in short, once something like this is allowed, it becomes mainstream, society reorganizes around it, and the lives of those who do not want to follow along inevitably become harder and harder. It happened with digital cash, to the point where even the Swedish central bank is worried about cash payments accessibility, so why wouldn't it happen in other sectors of technology as well?

About two weeks after the DeSantis signed the bill banning lab-grown meat, Google announced that it was rolling out a feature into Android that would analyze the contents of calls in real time, and would automatically give the user a warning if it thinks the user might be getting scammed. Financial scams are a large and growing problem, especially in regions like Southeast Asia, and they are becoming increasingly sophisticated more rapidly than many people can adapt. AI is accelerating this trend. Here, we see Google, creating a solution to help warn users about scams, and what's more, the solution is entirely client-side: there's no personal data being shipped off to any corporate or governmental Big Brother. This seems amazing; it's exactly the kind of tech that I advocated for in my post introducing d/acc. However, not all freedom-minded people were happy, and at least one of the detractors was very difficult to dismiss as just a Twitter troll: it was Meredith Whittaker, president of the Signal Foundation.

All three of these tensions are examples of things that have made a deep philosophical question repeatedly pop into my mind: what is the thing that people like myself, who think of ourselves as principled defenders of freedom, should actually be defending? What is the updated version of Scott Alexander's notion of liberalism as a peace treaty that makes sense in the twenty first century? Clearly, the facts have changed. Public goods are much more important than before, at larger scales than before. The internet has made communication abundant, rather than scarce. As Henry Farrell analyzed in his book on weaponized interdependence, modern information technology doesn't just empower the recipient: it also enables ongoing power projection by the creator. Existing attempts to deal with these questions are often haphazard, trying to treat them as exceptions that require principles to be tempered by pragmatic compromise. But what if there was a principled way of looking at the world, which values freedom and democracy, that can incorporate these challenges, and deal with them as a norm rather than an exception?

Vitalik Buterin's d/acc Philosophy

Vitalik Buterin's d/acc philosophy advocates a balanced approach to technology, emphasizing defensiveness, decentralization, and human prosperity. It promotes the responsible development of AI and blockchain technology, aiming to prevent technological monopolies and prioritize ethical progress.

Vitalik Buterin's d/acc philosophy proposes a thoughtful and balanced method for technological development, contrasting with unrestrained technological optimism. It emphasizes promoting technologies that foster defense, decentralization, and human prosperity, with particular attention to the prudent development of AI and the empowering potential of blockchain technology.

d/acc stands for Defensive, Decentralization, or Differential Acceleration. [...]

Principles of the d/acc Philosophy

In Vitalik Buterin's d/acc philosophy, each element plays a significant role, collectively forming the core of this philosophy.

• Defensive: The defensive element emphasizes safety and protective measures in technological development. In AI and other advanced technology areas, being defensive means ensuring that technology is not misused or leads to outcomes detrimental to humanity. For instance, preventing AI from being used to invade privacy or promote inequality, and ensuring new technologies do not exacerbate social divides or increase risks.
• Decentralization: Decentralization refers to reducing reliance on centralized power structures, enhancing the distributed and democratic nature of systems. In blockchain and digital currency areas, decentralization manifests in eliminating intermediary institutions, enabling direct interactions among users. Decentralization not only improves the transparency and security of systems but also enhances user control and autonomy.

Differential

In Vitalik Buterin's d/acc (Defensive, Decentralization, or Differential Acceleration) philosophy, Differential involves adopting methods in technological development that are different from traditional paths. Specifically, this could entail:

• Different Paths in Technological Development Differential means exploring development paths that diverge from mainstream technological trends, especially in addressing social, economic, and environmental issues.
• Personalization and Customization Considering individual differences and specific needs in technological solutions and innovations, thereby providing more customized and personalized services and products.
• Diversity in Innovation Encouraging diverse thinking and approaches in technological development, not limited to existing technological frameworks and models, but exploring new possibilities and innovative pathways.
• Technological Social Adaptability The differential also emphasizes that technology should adapt to society's diversity, including cultural, economic, and geographical differences, ensuring the universal applicability and inclusiveness of technology.

Overall, the differential in Vitalik Buterin's d/acc philosophy highlights adopting diverse, personalized, and adaptable approaches in technology innovation and application, aiming for comprehensive and sustainable technological development.

Techno-Optimism

On November 27, 2023, Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin published an article titled My techno-optimism on his blog. In this article, Buterin explores his views on techno-optimism, particularly concerning balancing technological development with societal and ethical responsibilities, especially in the fields of blockchain and artificial intelligence (AI). The year 2023 is seen as the year AI technology transformed from a concept in science fiction into a multifaceted tool, significantly impacting areas like global language understanding. At the same time, blockchain technology plays a foundational and invisible role in the digital world, providing a secure basis for virtual property. Additionally, with advancements from hardware companies, the virtual world has undergone significant changes, heralding a more vivid digital world experience.

In the article, Buterin criticizes the stagnation ideology that is skeptical of technological progress. He argues for a balanced prioritization of certain types of technology to mitigate the negative impacts of others. He presents three perspectives on technology: techno-pessimism (foreseeing a dystopian future), accelerationism (envisioning a utopian future), and his own view (recognizing past dangers but acknowledging multiple possible paths forward, both good and bad), particularly discussing blockchain and AI and their societal impacts.

Furthermore, Buterin mentions the influence of the Techno-Optimism Manifesto by Marc Andreessen, co-founder of the renowned Silicon Valley venture capital firm A16Z, and the subsequent debates among thought leaders. He reflects on the views of accelerationists like Marc Andreessen and YCombinator CEO Gary Tan and presents his perspectives.

Vitalik Buterin argues that AI and other technologies are fundamentally different, delving into the risks associated with AI and emphasizing the need for caution. The possibility of AI surpassing human intelligence and becoming the dominant species is a central focus of his argument. He raises the potential for AI to lead to human extinction, or at least a future that humans would not want to live in.

The article further explores the concept of d/acc (defensive or decentralized acceleration), advocating for technologies that support defensive, healthy, and democratic governance. Buterin emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between aggressive technologies and those leaning towards defense, advocating for the latter to promote a safer and freer world.

At the end of the article, he reflects on the future paths of superintelligence, considering options like multinational AI alliances or a polytheistic AI approach. Buterin leans towards cooperation between humans and AI, suggesting the use of brain-computer interfaces and other enhancement technologies to keep pace with AI development. He advocates for a future where humans retain meaningful agency, enhanced by AI rather than conquered by it.

Overall, Buterin's vision is a blend of optimism and caution, promoting technological development while emphasizing the crucial role of human choice and intent in shaping the future.

In d/acc, Vitalik Buterin underscores the importance of consciously guiding technological development. He believes that despite technology's significant global improvements in quality of life, its future direction needs careful consideration and guidance. He cites historical examples, like advancements in medicine and infrastructure, to demonstrate the substantial benefits of technology but also warns against the costs of uncontrolled technological development, such as climate change.