(i) The original vision of the Taifu
David: Is the current development of the ETA as compared to the original vision met expectations?
Vitalik: Development is far beyond expectations. The whole process, of course, is much longer than anticipated. When the White Paper was written in November 2013, I thought it was just a side project that could be completed in a few months before going back to school, but that was not the case. The concern that we had planned to achieve the PoS in four phases, which coincided with the depletion of the Foundation ' s funds, was to have stalled.
Many of the visions in the White Paper have become a reality: derivative applications do occur, ENS domain name systems do occur, and stabilization currencies have emerged successfully. At the same time, a number of unexpected innovation breakthroughs have emerged: the dynamic development of the DeFi ecology and the continuous evolution of various tokens, all of which have created a unique vitality beyond the original vision of the White Paper.
(ii) Core contributions and major accidents
David: Which are the most proud of your contribution to the world?
Vitalik: It makes openness and decentre into mainstream thinking that needs to be passed on from generation to generation. Like the free and open source movement of the 1990s, the block chains are a continuation of a new era.
The ETA has created a whole new possibility: to transform the forecast market from theory to reality and to remodel the organizational governance model of DAO. These innovations will continue to affect the coming decades.
In short, contributions are multifaceted.
Ryan: What are the major accidents in the development of the Ether factory? The things you didn't expect?
Vitalik: The Dao almost immediately crashed after obtaining such a huge amount of ETH. It was once as high as 11 per cent, i.e. 11 per cent of the total supply of the Taifeng. Is it 11% of the total or 11 million ETH? In the latter case, the proportion would be 17 per cent. In any case, the percentage was indeed alarmingly high. In retrospect, the former is more surprising than the latter, but both are unexpected.
Ryan: What other accidents?
Vitalik: In the context of the ETC hard-division battle. The technical game was a great one: the ETC dispute had just come to an end, and the Shanghai Dust attack had come to an end, and the timing had been perfect. The explosion of the NFT was completely unexpected, and DeFi was developing at an alarming rate. Uniswap was almost unknown in 2019, and in just 18 months there was an explosive growth.
Technology has evolved in different directions: the implementation of Proof of Interests (PoS) has taken far more time than expected, while the zero-knowledge certificate (ZK) has progressed five times faster than expected.
What is most surprising is the early attention from institutions and Governments, as early as the 2010s, when a large number of businesses and multinational Governments showed a strong interest, albeit more symbolic and innovative. Today, this concern is returning to ecology in a more pragmatic manner.
Ryan: You mentioned that overall progress is slower than expected in the White Paper. What are the specific delays? For example, does the landing of PoS take longer or does the rollup technology road map stand in the way? What are the root causes of these delays?
Vitalik: Part of the reason is that the complexity of software development goes beyond my experience at the time. Another part stems from our increasing standards, the original version of which, at its current level, can only be counted as the Layer2 programme on PrimeCoin.
The focus on the project in January 2014 made it clear that more serious results had to be delivered on that expectation, and it was decided to build a true Layer1. There was no basic chain for Layer2.
Ultimately, the combination of technical complexity and self-requirement leads to delays.
(iii) The approach to the challenge in the context of the Taifaf
David: How do you define a unique approach to dealing with unpredictable challenges by using the Tokyo formula, based on the practice of the decade?
Vitalik: The synergistic attack model of the `System' ecosystem has been very effective: the multi-path innovation of synchronizing Layer1 and the application layer, with competition programmes in various fields.
This parallel capacity is remarkable and there are synergies between different paths (e.g. co-mobilization of ZK-SNARKs technology). It's not perfect, but it's strong.
(iv) Recommendations transmitted to Little Vitalik
David: If you can go back to the early stages of the Ether Fever, you will choose which time node you will be able to pass on to yourself in your youth or to the Ether Fountain Foundation. What exactly will it guide?
Vitalik: If I can get back to the beginning, I'll take out all of the ZK-SNARKs that are available. This technology is subversive, and it avoids many technical circuits. The unforeseeable future is indeed one of the limitations of the development of the ETA. I have often been asked what advice I would give to myself in the past, and perhaps, in addition to technical options, I should be reminded of a more realistic approach to time expectations.
At the economic and social levels, different mechanisms for the supply of public goods may be used. For example, the no pre-drilling model allows miners to decide on the developer ' s allocation based on the last 1024 block votes. This would not only achieve a similar funding allocation to the current situation, but would also build greater credibility at an early stage.
The early relationship with bitcoin is also worth rethinking. The Ether House could have been part of a bitcoin block. The whole process could be more constructive if the Taifeng were to remain a bitcoin block chain, although it might still occur. Of course, moving forward with established communities and facing the constraints of stakeholders makes it difficult to implement many of the plans and it is difficult to say which option is better.
(v) Bitcoin VS Ether Workshop
Ryan: Do you think bitcoin's relationship with the Ether House has improved? There seems to be less hostility between the new generation of bitcoin and its supporters. How do you describe the current relationship?
Vitalik: This depends on the category of so-called “new groups”. One group focuses on technological innovation practitioners such as BitVM, Taproot, Opcat, and the other on “Sailoris”, with no expectations of a consensus between the latter and the Etherak.
Wise technology observers have increasingly recognized the dual achievement of the Ethera: technological innovation and the practical advancement of privacy protection. At the same time, the efforts of the Bitcoin community in innovation, such as Opcat, are also to be commended, where an attractive technological breakthrough is taking place.
Overall, relations are developing.
(vi) Positioning and strategy in the utensils
David: When you see the developers expanding the programmability of Bitcoin through technical programmes such as BitVM, will the idea of “Why not be based directly on the development of the Taifung?” Or are you curious and optimistic about their possibilities?
Vitalik: Both.
David: No matter how social thinking changes, the Ether House remains the same, is it deliberately designed? Should the Ether House be a fortress against the tides of the times?
Vitalik: The ETA is essentially an inclusive and pluralistic ecosystem. In the context of the multi-ecological coexistence of encrypted currency, cultural differences naturally arise between projects. Each project should be based on the values of its community identity and promote substantive progress rather than rhetoric.
This year I focused on two main directions: the reform of the DAO public goods financing mechanism. The existing mechanisms are flawed, and we are developing a V2 version based on a forecast market, which will build an “open access order” in conjunction with a jury mechanism.
The second is to advance privacy technology. Since 1982, eCash, privacy is at the heart of the code punk. Today, technologies such as ZK-SNARKs break the “centre + privacy” or “decentre + transparency” dilemma. We are committed to innovations such as the standardization of privacy pools so that users do not have to rely on centralized services.
In cultural positioning, the Ethera has to build a technological bastion of freedom while countering fraud and speculation. This requires a concerted effort on the part of the entire ecology.
(vii) Mainstreaming of traditional financial values and traditions
Ryan: How to develop a realistic path to privacy? Will it be possible to allow users both to obtain satisfactory solutions and to allow national regimes that uphold freedom to tolerate their development? What is the possible balance between technological breakthroughs and policy constraints?
Vitalik: This question contains two key points: first, how to make privacy protection a default, and secondly, how to obtain regulatory recognition.
I do not support the implementation of privacy functions directly at the chain level (e.g., the EIP 7503), not because of conceptual issues, but because current technology is not sufficiently mature. Premature fixation of privacy protocols may lead to system rigidity, and privacy data are more difficult to upgrade than open data and cannot simply replace updates.
David: Does this mean that you think that the achievement of privacy in the Taifung base is fundamentally the right direction?
Vitalik: I am open to basic privacy, but there are two key factors to balance: future compatibility and security. L1 privacy loopholes may lead to large-scale asset theft that cannot be detected, but with technological advances (e.g. AI-aided development), code security will rise to unimaginable levels for traditional researchers.
Zcash has achieved chain privacy, but the threshold is high. My medium-term goal is to promote the default of wallet-side privacy - The current error is that private wallets are considered as separate goods, whereas in practice privacy should be the basic function of all wallets. Through modularization, existing wallets fully integrate privacy characteristics.
Ryan: What do you mean?
Vitalik: The "Personal Balance" button is shown in the wallets of MetaMask, Rabiby or Ambire as a standard functional module.
Ryan: Is this possible under current technical conditions? If so, why not land?
Vitalik: Work has been initiated within the Taifung Foundation to promote this direction. Substantial progress is expected in the coming months.
Ryan: How to enlist the support of the state authorities? Is there a balance between responding to the legitimate concerns of States about crime and money-laundering and preserving the core value of code punks? Or are the two irreconcilable?
Vitalik: Privacy pool technology has made significant progress and programmes such as Railway and Railgun have been effective in preventing the transfer of stolen money by DeFi hackers. Such agreements have demonstrated practical value through chain blacklist mechanisms and are particularly suited to dealing with the two main types of illicit financial flows, namely, the DeFi loophole and individual theft.
In contrast to imperfect anti-crime mechanisms, the transparency of the public chain is better: money flows can be traced and unusual transactions can be warned. We can provide better privacy protection while maintaining French-currency control.
It also needs to be made clear to regulators that excessive data collection presents systemic risks. Cases such as hacking of data collected under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act indicate that if a centralized database is leaked, “national security data” can instead threaten national security. Privacy-based finance should be the focus of policy discussions as a solution to minimize data collection.
Ryan: Do you seem to be implying that you want to adhere to the principle of the privacy of encrypted currency and the Etherwood? When the traditional financial forces enter what you call the "Multiple Ether House", how does the border be demarcated? When should the code punk values be upheld? When should compromise be adapted to market demand?
Vitalik: The commitment to privacy and code punk values needs to focus on two core dimensions:
The protocol layer is the foundation. Just as a central back end can only be built for a central application, it is difficult to develop a top-level privacy ecology if the block chain base layer does not support original privacy and access without intermediaries. This is precisely why I continue to optimize the abstraction of accounts and EIP-7701, avoiding the use of smart wallets, multiple-signature schemes and other intermediaries that are forced to rely on single-point failure risks. The core objective is to ensure that funds are free to move even if all servers connected by users are disabled.
Guarantees of feasibility are equally crucial. Strong privacy, de-intermediated use patterns should exist at least as options, requiring synergistic support from protocol layers, wallet layers and application layers. While most users may still choose traditional options, the lack of infrastructure or structural exclusion from agreed standards must be prevented.
The lessons of e-mail are alarming, and, although theoretically open agreements, the operationalization is highly central to the policies of the main service providers. In order to avoid a repetition of the past, we have pre-positioned a server-free solution when we design the Taifung standards (e.g. across the Layer2 agreement).
The path to achieving this lies in a dual guarantee: the technical level of dedicated supervision of standard-setting to ensure the practicality of privacy-friendly programmes; and the social level of a consensus that new standards must be compatible with autonomy options. Even if most users continueCoinbaseThe hosting service, for example, is a major step forward as long as the option of autonomy exists and is supported by ecological fundamentals.
(viii) The mission of Etherwood
Ryan: What should be the role of the Taifung in the face of the future picture of AI-led, geo-stressed, world-discretioned? Technological innovations, such as genetic editing, are also reshaping the future. What is the mission of Ethera?
Vitalik: I'm glad we're able to agree on genetic editing and AI risk awareness, contrary to what many people think. The future role of the ETA can be understood in two dimensions:
At the value level of the product, a neutral infrastructure that does not depend on any central entity has been built with a Taifaf to safeguard the freedom and autonomy of users. In this increasingly divided world, that value is increasingly precious. Fifteen years ago, people believed in Facebook and now only gave block chain technology. The evolution of trust technologies has been witnessed from the “discretionary” discourse (e.g. Facebook) to the current discussion of TEE by cloud service providers.
At the community-building level, the ETA brings together innovators who focus on cutting-edge areas such as finance and new governance models. Even in extreme situations, the value of the community remains. The vision of “world computers” has evolved into a more precise “world books” positioning. L1 was established as a core value and the synergy with L2 was clarified.
David: What is ETH if the Taifeng is to be considered a world book?
Vitalik: Now we need to think: what is the "gas" counterpart in the world of accounts? Perhaps ink. Is it feasible to use an ink with TM symbols to calculate the Layer2 formula, and it is the basic fuel (gas) without TM symbols?
(ix) Ether Workshop 2024
David: In 2024, a difficult period was experienced as a result of the continued low relative prices of the ETH in the Taifung. Do you think Ether's been through a difficult 2024?
Vitalik: Of course.
David: How do you interpret this phenomenon? Could you elaborate on the development of the Taifeng in 2024?
Vitalik: The central challenge facing the Ether is the alternation of old and new narratives. While the ETH price downturn is a symptom, the deeper problem is that old narratives (e.g. DAO governance, NFT boom) are gradually losing their appeal, while the emerging MEME culture is in conflict with the core values of the Ether House.
This dilemma is further exacerbated by the incentive imbalance between L1 and L2. Following the implementation of EIP-4844, cost market contradictions were revealed, reflecting the structural tension between the base and extension layers. This technology route is particularly acute in the downward cycle of currency prices.
However, the turnover is emerging. In 2025, we began to see the emergence of innovative programmes that both create economic value and are in line with the spirit of the Taifaf. These Forces nouvelles are re-establishing market confidence and re-energizing the ecology.
David: Is the Etherdorf community still arguing whether the 2024 dilemma stems from narrative warfare or from real technical problems? Does the Rollup-centred road map deviate from expectations?
Vitalik: These adjustments are necessary, and change factors already exist, with only trigger points. Leadership turnover is a case in point: after all, it is not appropriate for the Executive Director (who has served longer than other members of the EF) to transfer Aya to the Board of Directors to focus on inclusive finance. The new technical leaders, Tom and Shelly, each have their own strengths, and the new team leads the optimization and privacy focus, respectively, to move the PSE from theory to application. Sooner or later, these changes will accelerate the process in special times.
EF focuses on two directions: raising the L1 Gas cap and advancing L2 interoperability. But, most urgently, capital efficiency is key to reducing the time of cross-chain cash withdrawal from one week to 12 seconds. The inefficiency of the roll-out will result in the failure of the original programme to the multi-bridged programme.
There is a need for collaboration: EF R & D, L2 team optimization, ZK-EVM technical support, etc. It will take time, but with confidence in the current path. Strengthen the L1 core position, clarify the L2-L1 relationship, and build a stronger ecology.
(x) How to modify economic synergy bias
Ryan: The lack of economic coordination is a deep-seated crisis, and do you think we can correct this economic synergy bias? Is the current progress still unsatisfactory?
Vitalik: Economic synergy can be examined in terms of cost mechanisms and network effects. The current contribution of L2 costs is insufficient, and raising the minimum base fee or blob fee (e.g. 1 gwei) does help, but the network effect is critical. That is why I emphasized the “one-hour time” when L1 would be marginalized if all assets were issued at L2 and through a bridge.
The key to maintaining the L1 core position is that even though most activities are in L2, the issuance of assets still needs to anchor L1. This not only raises the level of trust (avoiding reliance on L2 governance), but also offers three main advantages:
- Security model clearer: L1 as final arbiter
- Enhancement of unauthorizedness: Application free to move across L2
- Technical compatibility: L1-L2 Synced DeFi operations can support all assets by nature
Specific measures should include:
Raise the minimum blob to 1 gwei
- Optimizing standard access routes
- Development of synchronous grouping block technologies for L2 and L1
- We must insist that the value of L2 stems from the core concept of interaction with L1 and the ability to discharge responsibilities, rather than simply having an independent chain of cross-links.
Ryan: Does this constitute a strategic shift (pivot) to prioritize L1 expansion with the new leadership of the Taifung Foundation? From your point of view, what are the core arguments that currently drive the L1 expansion?
Vitalik: The safe expansion of the Ether L1 must hold three bottom lines: to ensure the stable functioning of the network, to maintain the nodal decentrization, and to protect the pledged ecological health. Now we have access to breakthrough technology — the ZK virtual machine is close to production, supporting the Gas ceiling by three to five times, while providing the affected small pledgeer with a ZK certification programme; historical data optimization reduces the storage of nodes by hundreds of GBs, with distributed storage to ensure that data are verifiable; block-accessible list technology achieves a full parallel validation of transactions, breaking down the implementation bottlenecks with I/O.
These innovations are reshaping the expansive paradigm: the ZK Validation Node security threshold is contained within one third, distributed network-protected data integrity, and parallel structures are increasing insinuation efficiency. The evolution of technology presents a clear path - it is now in a phase similar to the Rollup Staage1, and is moving towards the implementation of Stace 2 for most nodes across the network, which will eventually achieve the 36-day data cycle optimization. The seemingly contradictory goals of expansion and decentrization are now being realized in synergy with these highly optimized new technologies.
Ryan: Will the three-fold annual expansion target set by Donkrad be achieved while maintaining the current decentrization level of the Taifeng? Do you think these goals are realistic?
Vitalik: The expansion of the Ether is facing the challenge of decentrization and balancing performance. I am particularly concerned about the risk of a very short period of time, with a 12-second block-out cycle associated with the 10,000 TPS programme, which is well above and below the current TPS level in safety, and which stems from physical constraints such as light speed communication. While caution is exercised with regard to certain objectives, there is considerable room for optimization of the 45 million Gas ceiling.
Node mode is undergoing a fundamental shift. Light client support, such as Helios, for insider authentication of wallets, while privacy needs are promoting the spread of self-establishment nodes and using privacy protocols to avoid leaking search records to Infra.
We use a two-track technology strategy: full-node reduction of storage needs to 80 GB through data optimization, L1 expansion of only 2.4 TB by 30 times; light client transition from TEE/ORAM to PIR programme to privacy protection for queries. These breakthroughs are expected to go beyond the decentrization level in 2017 and, while the risk of the centralization of pledge and block construction still needs to be monitored, the Inn is opening innovative paths that combine expansion, decentrization, privacy and censorship.
David: Why would HFTs destroy the soul of the block chain? How is the current L1 expansion strategy different from the HFC model?
Vitalik: Over-optimizing a single indicator necessarily takes other dimensions. This is the general pattern of behaviour optimization. In the area of HFCs, endless low-delayed competitions reinforce the trend towards centralization. In the case of one-second block, only 500 milliseconds of delay is allowed at each stage, which requires extreme point-to-point optimization, while the zero-delayed advantage of co-location of nodes stimulates the overall centrist motivation.
L2 attention needs to be focused on a centralized scenario (e.g. HFT) that depends on L1's safety and security; L1 retains its decentrized nature. I prefer L2 as an independent ranking because it clearly delineates value boundaries. Such a structure would also adapt to the future AI economy, with access to the “city books” through L2.
L1 needs to be improved (e.g., by reducing the amount of time available), but the bottom line must be maintained: moderate and low delays are borne by L1 and extreme performance is given to L2. This stratification is the intelligent choice to protect the Etherwood spirit.
Etherland Nationalism
David: Should the Ether House also be prominent in something? My partner Ryan is trying to become an "Ether House Nationalist" and to promote the uniqueness of its core values. If it is for you to define this “ethic nationalism”, which cultures and values should be accentuated?
Vitalik: This process of reflection is very enlightening, from a trade-off of technology to a larger structural philosophy. The multilayered structure of the Taifeng (L1 and L2) has creatively achieved hard-to-reach objectives in traditional perceptions, as modern polity balances efficiency and restraint through institutional design. Its sophistication is reflected in three core mechanisms:
- Certification system: L1 certification mechanism to ensure that L2 is not corrupt
- Escape route: L1 reserves the right to enforce compulsory transactions as the ultimate guarantee
- Governance switches: reversible issue sorter for voting in the chain against censorship
This design creates a unique and innovative sandbox: L1 maintains a strong decentrization as a base layer, while allowing L2 to explore different centralization/performance trade-offs on their tracks. The essence is not to look for “best single points”, but to build a meta-system that can accommodate a multiplicity of possibilities, which is the most unique value of the Taifeng.
Ryan: What do you think of the recent emergence of the ETH National Debt Corporation? For example, among podcasts, Tom Lee offered to buy 5% of the ETH traffic. Do you think such capital instruments are ecologically friendly, harmful or neutral?
Vitalik: With regard to the value of ETH, I think it is the largest economic consensus anchor for the entire ETA ecology. Maintaining the centrality of ETH is essential. If the economic incentives of key organizations, such as Base, Banks and EF, are fully divided, communities will fall apart. The economic consensus created by ETH has an irreplaceable nuclear dimension.
I have multiple theories about the source of ETH values (sometimes finding it difficult to vouch for a joke like “ETH prices are controlled by 14 demons on Jupiter satellites”), but in any case, making the Etherpo the core ecology of global financial applications remains in the right direction. Whether it is the capture of transaction costs or the theory of the network effect, what we should do most is that we can strengthen the ETH value base from a multidimensional perspective.
As for these sovereign companies, it is inexplicable. They are essentially a leveraged financial product between options and derivatives: investors are invested and companies buy ETH centrally.
David: What is your favorite theory?
Vitalik: My favorite ETH National Debt Agency? It's probably not the United States Government. After all, they always take ETH from hackers. It's cool.
(xii) Vision for the next decade
Ryan: What are your plans for the next decade? If the work is not completed, what are the key milestones you wish to achieve during this decade?
Vitalik: Over the next decade, technological evolution in the Taifeng will focus on three main directions: first, the full implementation of ZK-SNARKs/STARKs certification techniques, the optimization of algorithms, and light quantification of nodes; second, the use of privacy protection as a basic function, extending from payments to complex scenarios such as DeFi; and, lastly, the construction of a fully verifiable security system that covers the full technical warehouse from application to hardware.
In terms of social impact, ETA works to reshape the financial infrastructure: by allowing users to move their assets freely without permission for interoperability and privacy protection, the code-based trust-free model becomes a new norm. Just as HTTPS replaced HTTP, such a change would make traditional models of trust obsolete. It is becoming a central driver of this revolution of trust.
Ryan: How do you see your role in the Ether? Will this vision be fulfilled? What does it mean to you personally?
Vitalik: Continuing to promote the development of the Etheraf will remain my core mission for the next decade. I have been deeply involved in the broader work of DEAC over the past few years. For example, the biological defence issues that we discussed, as well as the security-building at the bottom of the deal, will continue.
In essence, my goal remains the same: to build an open, safe and credible whole-of-the-world, a vision that encompasses both the Ethera and the wider ecosystem. That is what I have been pursuing since I participated in bitcoin in 2011, and now we are making it a reality.