Buterin: Open Systems as Global Check on Power and Distrust

Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, has intensified his advocacy for open-source and verifiable infrastructure as a safeguard against monopolistic control and systemic distrust in critical sectors. In a series of recent blog posts and public statements, Buterin argues that closed, centralized systems in healthcare, finance, and governance create vulnerabilities that enable abuse of power and erode public trust. His vision emphasizes open-source solutions to ensure transparency, accountability, and equitable access to infrastructure that underpins modern society.

Buterin’s critique centers on the risks posed by proprietary systems, which he contends concentrate power in the hands of corporations or governments. He highlights the 2020–2021 vaccine rollout as a case study, where proprietary production processes and opaque communication exacerbated global disparities. By contrast, open-source initiatives like PopVax demonstrate how transparency can reduce costs and rebuild trust. Buterin stresses that open systems allow anyone to inspect and verify infrastructure, creating a “check on power” that closed systems lack. This principle, he argues, is equally applicable to digital health records, biotechnology, and governance tools.

In finance, Buterin contrasts blockchain’s efficiency with traditional systems. He notes that an Ethereum transaction settles in seconds, while routine legal filings in the U.S. can cost $119 and take days. This disparity, he argues, underscores the inefficiencies of closed financial rails and the potential of blockchain to streamline processes. However, he cautions that open infrastructure must also prioritize privacy, a theme reflected in Ethereum’s privacy roadmap unveiled in 2025. Buterin envisions a future where open-source phones double as secure wallets and transparent health trackers, blending accessibility with privacy.

Governance and elections are another focal point. Buterin critiques “black box” voting machines and other opaque systems that undermine democratic trust. He advocates for verifiable voting technologies and open-source legal tools to ensure outcomes are auditable by citizens. His concerns extend to data security: he warns that insecure health or biometric data could enable blackmail, predatory insurance pricing, or even physical threats. For example, a hacked brain-computer interface, he notes, could allow hostile actors to manipulate users’ minds.

Buterin’s broader argument challenges the traditional “public goods” framework for funding digital infrastructure. In a 2025 article, he argues that open-source development—defined by shared knowledge, code, and standards—is more effective than the nebulous concept of public goods. He emphasizes that open-source projects, such as core blockchain research or widely used software libraries, generate diffuse public benefits while enabling global scalability. For instance, open-source models could address challenges in environmental monitoring or decentralized energy infrastructure, whereas projects like national defense, which require secrecy, may not qualify as global public goods.

The urgency of Buterin’s call stems from his belief that closed systems are becoming increasingly entrenched. He warns that without open alternatives, corporations and governments will perpetuate profit-driven models that prioritize control over empowerment. This risk is already evident in sectors like healthcare, where data-driven medicine relies on centralized data collection, and governance, where inefficiencies in legal and bureaucratic systems persist. Buterin’s vision extends beyond crypto to advocate for open-source infrastructure in areas such as education, civic services, and even AI governance.

Critics and policymakers are taking note. While some question the feasibility of fully open systems in high-security contexts, others acknowledge the need for hybrid models that balance transparency with performance. Buterin’s advocacy aligns with broader regulatory shifts in 2025, including the U.S. GENIUS Act and the EU’s MiCA framework, which prioritize transparency and accountability in stablecoin issuance and digital asset markets. These developments reflect a growing consensus that open, verifiable systems are essential for building trust in technology-driven societies.