Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin emphasized that users do not need to share his views on applications, trust assumptions, politics, decentralized finance, social platforms, privacy payments, artificial intelligence, or cultural preferences to freely use the Ethereum network. He believes that disagreement on one topic does not imply agreement or disagreement on any other.
“Corposlop” Is Not Censorship
In a detailed post on X, Buterin clarified that he does not represent the entire Ethereum ecosystem. He described Ethereum as a decentralized protocol built for permissionless use and censorship resistance, allowing anyone to interact with the network regardless of his opinions, the Ethereum Foundation, or Ethereum client developers.
He stated that labeling applications he dislikes as “corposlop” does not constitute censorship. Free speech, he argued, means individuals cannot prevent others from acting, though criticism is allowed and expected, just as critics themselves can be critiqued.
Buterin rejected the idea of “pretend neutrality,” where individuals claim openness to all perspectives while avoiding taking clear positions. He said neutrality is appropriate for protocols such as Ethereum, Bitcoin, or HTTP, but individuals should clearly state their principles, identify what conflicts with them, and collaborate with like-minded people to build metaverses that respect those principles as a baseline. He explained that principles naturally extend beyond protocol design into decisions about what should be built on top of the protocol and into broader social and cultural contexts.
Freedom Extends Beyond Technology
He also warned against treating freedom as relevant only to technical design, calling this approach hollow. Decentralized protocols do not belong to a single metaverse, and people often agree on some aspects while disagreeing on others.
Buterin’s remarks follow his recent comments supporting Bitcoin maximalists’ concerns about digital sovereignty. He argued that today’s internet favors corporate-controlled systems that erode user autonomy and that true sovereignty involves protecting privacy, attention, and control from profit-driven platforms not just resisting governments.
