Connect with us

Crypto World

Vitalik’s $6.95M ETH Move: Personal Agenda or Ethereum Foundation Strategy?

Published

on

Nexo Partners with Bakkt for US Crypto Exchange and Yield Programs

TLDR:

  • Vitalik Buterin withdrew 3,500 ETH worth $6.95M from Aave, resuming sales after a two-week pause.
  • The Ethereum Foundation entered a period of mild austerity to balance development goals and long-term sustainability.
  • Buterin personally absorbed Foundation-level responsibilities, funding open-source software, hardware, and biotech projects.
  • Community observers question whether Buterin’s personal ETH-funded projects align with the Foundation’s core protocol mandate.

Vitalik Buterin’s recent withdrawal of 3,500 ETH, valued at approximately $6.95 million, from lending protocol Aave has drawn fresh scrutiny.

On-chain analytics account Lookonchain flagged the transaction, noting that 571 ETH had already been sold shortly after.

Buterin followed the activity with a lengthy public post explaining his plans. Still, the line between a personal initiative and an Ethereum Foundation strategy remains worth examining closely.

A Personal Undertaking With Foundation-Level Scope

Buterin made clear that the Ethereum Foundation is currently entering a period of reduced spending. The organization aims to balance an aggressive development roadmap with long-term financial sustainability. These two goals sit at the center of what he described as “mild austerity.”

Within that context, Buterin stated that he is personally absorbing responsibilities previously handled as the Foundation’s special projects.

Advertisement

This is a notable shift. It moves significant decision-making and funding away from the institutional structure and into his individual hands.

The 16,384 ETH he disclosed withdrawing will fund a broad range of open-source technology efforts. These cover areas include finance, communication, governance, operating systems, secure hardware, and biotech. The scale of these goals is far larger than what most would consider a purely personal project.

Advertisement

This creates a reasonable question for observers. If the Foundation is tightening its budget, and Buterin is personally funding work that falls within the Foundation’s stated mission, where does one end and the other begin? That distinction has not been fully addressed in his public statement.

Community Scrutiny Follows the On-Chain Activity

Lookonchain reported that Buterin resumed selling ETH after a two-week pause. At the time of the report, he had already moved 571 ETH worth around $1.13 million into the market. The timing, coming alongside his public explanation, drew significant attention from crypto observers.

Buterin referenced a range of existing projects to support his stated vision. These include the Vensa open-silicon initiative, the uCritter platform featuring ZK and FHE privacy tools, air-quality monitoring work, and encrypted-messaging donations. Together, they paint a consistent picture of where his focus is directed.

However, some in the community have noted that these projects span well beyond Ethereum’s core protocol development.

Advertisement

Supporting biotech, secure hardware, and operating systems through personal ETH sales raises questions about how these efforts connect to the Foundation’s primary mandate.

Buterin addressed this indirectly by drawing a firm line between genuine openness and commercial openness. He stated his support is for technology that is “actually open” and verifiably working for users, not systems locked behind paid APIs.

Whether that vision is a personal philosophy or a new institutional direction for Ethereum remains an open question for the community to watch.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Crypto World

Disagreement Means a DAO Is Healthy: Curve Finance Founder

Published

on

Decentralization, DAO, Aave, Curve Finance

Disagreements within a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) are a sign of a healthy DAO, according to Dr. Michael Egorov, founder of the decentralized finance (DeFi) platform Curve Finance.

DAOs are a decentralized organizational structure that relies on smart contracts to automate functions and member voting to govern onchain protocols.

Egorov said that both a 2024 governance proposal involving the Curve DAO and the recent dispute involving the Aave DAO illustrate the importance of disagreements to the structure’s vitality. He told Cointelegraph:

“If everyone automatically agrees on something, it feels like people just don’t really care. They vote for whatever comes in, or they don’t participate at all. The first sign of that would be governance apathy, like when people are not voting at all.”

That earlier Curve DAO matter concerned a 2024 governance proposal to provide Swiss Stake AG, the main developer behind the Curve Finance protocol, with a grant valued at about $6.3 million at the time, which drew significant pushback from members of the Curve DAO.

Advertisement
Decentralization, DAO, Aave, Curve Finance
The 2024 proposal for a grant to Swiss Stake AG. Source: Curve Governance

Egorov noted that the proposal was revised and resubmitted in December 2025, and the redrafted proposal received over 80% turnout from DAO members.

An analysis last year by blockchain development company LamprosTech found that “Voter turnout in most DAOs rarely passes 15%, concentrating decision-making power in the hands of a small, active group.”

Curve token holders lock up their tokens for a long period, which encourages long-term governance engagement, Egorov said.

Egorov said that DAOs represent a new model for human organization that is distinct from a company or a self-sovereign country, but features elements of a sovereign country, including political parties voicing disagreement about how to govern a protocol.

Related: Core technical contributor to cease involvement with Aave DAO

Advertisement

Aave dispute highlights challenges in onchain governance and intellectual property rights 

In December 2025, a governance dispute erupted between Aave Labs, the main development company of Aave products, and the Aave DAO over fees from the integration with DeFi exchange aggregator CoW Swap.

Decentralization, DAO, Aave, Curve Finance
One member of the Aave DAO raises questions about fees from the CoW Swap integration. Source: Aave Governance

Members of the DAO were critical of the fees from the integration going directly to a wallet controlled by Aave Labs, and the pushback sparked a debate over which entity has rightful control over intellectual property on the DeFi platform.

A proposal was then submitted to the Aave DAO to bring Aave brand assets and intellectual property under the control of the DAO; it ultimately failed to pass.

Legal recognition of DAOs could mitigate governance disputes

DAOs cannot interact with the real world without regulated legal structures, like business entities or bank accounts, and DAO control over intellectual property is a common governance issue, Egorov said.

DAOs are a great fit for governing anything onchain, he said, adding that users should also experiment with DAOs for offchain elements as well, though centralized companies might be a better fit to manage offchain structures.

Advertisement

If DAOs could be legally recognized and interact with the traditional financial world, owning business entities and bank accounts, it could mitigate governance disputes, Egorov said, adding that the legal system has yet to catch up to the latest technology.

Magazine: Real AI use cases in crypto, No. 2: AIs can run DAOs