logo
Lessons From ETH Dublin: The Crypto Community Grows Up

Lessons From ETH Dublin: The Crypto Community Grows Up

Forbes27-05-2025

Hackathon teams present their projects at ETH Dublin, with one team explaining how their solution ... More addresses doom-scrolling and screen-time goals.
Paul Dylan Ennis, an Irish academic, sits in front of the stage next to Vitalik Buterin, the founder of Ethereum. They are sat in a Dublin cellar, flanked by pictures of padron peppers and tomatoes. A professor at University College Dublin, Ennis does not look like a stereotypical academic. He is covered in tattoos, including a prominent Ethereum logo inked on his skin. As the conference unfolds around him, he finds himself thinking about a sci-fi essay he once wrote exploring what the world would look like if everyone lived as sovereign individuals. His thought experiment asked: what if we took the ideals that the crypto community holds sacred and made them universal?
The world we live in today would have seemed like strange science fiction to many of the people who attended ETH Berlin in 2018, when I first saw Buterin in person. Or at least I think I saw him, because he may have been wearing a fur suit during what was then a fringe gathering of crypto enthusiasts. But here's an even more sci-fi twist: many of the hackathon projects at ETH Dublin were built using AI coding tools that didn't exist seven years ago, creating better minimum viable products faster than anyone could have imagined.
What strikes me about Ennis's reflection is the apparent lack of recognition from many in crypto circles that, in many ways, this vision has already materialized. Yet here they are, trapped in an odd dynamic of discussing the same topics they debated seven years ago, seemingly oblivious to how dramatically reality has shifted since then.
Paul Dylan Ennis (left) and Vitalik Buterin during a talk at ETH Dublin, discussing crypto's ... More evolution in the venue's atmospheric stone cellar.
I sat through a panel called "Can we onboard the masses?" where "IrishNFTGal" spoke about onboarding her 90-year-old grandmother to nonfungible tokens (NFTs), admitting that she "didn't get much out of it." The conversation felt like a time warp. The same earnest discussions about user experience and mass adoption that dominated Berlin 2018, as if nothing had changed.
But here's the uncomfortable truth the crypto community struggles to acknowledge: average users are much more interested in speculation than in vague concepts like "individual sovereignty" and "privacy," which remain abstract, ideological and political to most people. Crypto delivered exactly what users actually wanted, easy access to financial speculation, rather than what idealists preached they should want.
The adoption Buterin does celebrate represents crypto's quieter victory. EU and Taiwan digital ID systems based on zero-knowledge proofs, the seeping of open source culture from crypto-adjacent circles to broader tech, crypto principles shaping AI conversations. This infrastructure and ideological influence spread even as the community obsessed over pictures of monkeys on a blockchain. These examples showcase crypto's philosophical wins, where decentralized thinking has permeated traditional institutions and shaped how governments and technologists approach digital systems.
But there's another kind of adoption story that Buterin doesn't highlight, one that tells a different tale about what users actually want. Bitcoin exchange-traded funds allow mainstream investors to speculate without understanding keys or wallets. TrumpCoin and other memecoins let millions participate in speculative theater through financial markets. Prediction market Polymarket is widely cited on the news. Apps like Revolut enable instant crypto speculation from your phone. This is mass adoption too, just not the kind that makes crypto conferences feel good about themselves.
Judges deliberate on hackathon submissions at ETH Dublin, reviewing projects in the venue's historic ... More stone cellar spaces.
The most telling sign of crypto's maturation wasn't found in any panel discussion, but in the venue logistics. ETH Dublin and a major Solana event shared the same space. This is an acknowledgment of how massive Solana has become and how the ecosystem has evolved beyond ideological purity.
Many submissions at ETH Dublin had also been pitched at various Solana hackathons. Builders now follow opportunity across chains rather than pledging allegiance to single ecosystems. One of the speakers on the ETH Dublin stage, Dr. Nick Almond, announced that he had recently changed employers to Jito, a Solana restaking protocol. Alejandro Gutierrez, one of the founders of ETH Dublin, was the butt of several jokes for also participating in the Solana ecosystem. While it's somewhat new for speakers to be openly "curious" about which chains they support, the people in the crowd have always been 'multi-chain curious', except at some bitcoin events, where some attendees are genuinely monotheistic about their chosen cryptocurrency (even if the speakers aren't). A person I met who pitched at ETH Dublin was an ambassador for Avalanche and also built an open source bitcoin wallet. Crypto factions seem important from within, but all crypto people are the same to outsiders.
Perhaps most tellingly, Base (Coinbase's layer-2 on Ethereum) had a prominent presence sponsoring workshops. Base is self-admittedly early on its journey to decentralization, which is corporate speak for "not decentralized at all yet." But it serves user needs easily and efficiently. The community's embrace of Base represents a fundamental shift: a recognition of pragmatism over purity, whatever works for users over ideological consistency. Or a betrayal of ideals, depending on who you ask.
ETH Dublin attendees collaborate on a project during the hackathon
The hackathon results revealed both continuity and transformation. The overall quality was dramatically higher than previous years, largely thanks to AI-assisted development tools that allow teams to build better minimum viable products faster. Yet the themes remained disparate, with sophisticated AI integration sitting alongside retro ideas like putting ancestry records on blockchain.
The winning projects told the story of crypto's practical evolution. RecEth, which took first place, generates confirmation emails for crypto transactions, a simple solution bridging the expected user experience of traditional finance with crypto's reality. Latinum, the second-place winner, provides payment middleware enabling Model Context Protocol builders to monetize their services, allowing AI agents to manage budgets and make autonomous payments. Fundraisly aims to become a global platform for legally compliant fundraising, while my personal favorite LockedIn creates a social platform where users stake ether to combat doom-scrolling habits.
These projects address real behavioral and infrastructure problems rather than chasing ideological goals. Some ideas remained stuck in 2018's mindset, but the execution was powered by 2025's technology stack. Perhaps a metaphor for some of the crypto space.
Many of the participants were the same people who were around 7 years ago, but the conference's introspective mood reflected more than just aging. There's a palpable sense of disillusionment with crypto's own governance experiments. The journey from DAOFest 2018's optimism to Buterin's suggestion to "burn decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) to the ground" in 2025 represents one of crypto's most sobering lessons.
Instead of becoming digital cooperatives for the 21st century, DAOs largely devolved into digital homeowners' association meetings complete with petty politics, bureaucratic inefficiency and governance theater. The very people who believed most deeply in decentralized governance are now its harshest critics.
This disillusionment extends beyond DAOs to the broader growing pains accompanying crypto's success. Internal politics and bureaucratic struggles now characterize organizations that once prided themselves on revolutionary simplicity. The demographics have shifted from young idealists to seasoned veterans grappling with institutional weight and responsibility.
The community has grown up, but growth brought unexpected burdens. Privacy technology has experienced a renaissance (evident in Monero's price action and advances in zero-knowledge research) partly as a course correction against crypto's uncomfortable proximity to establishment power.
Buterin himself has been pushing privacy tools with renewed urgency, recognizing that the original cypherpunk ethos of crypto has been overshadowed by mainstream financial adoption. The recent power changes in the US have made privacy feel fundamentally important again to many in the more libertarian leaning community. What was once dismissed as paranoid libertarian fantasy now feels prescient as crypto finds itself caught between regulatory embrace and surveillance concerns. Zero-knowledge proofs, once a niche academic pursuit, have become a rallying cry for preserving crypto's original promise of financial sovereignty even as the industry courts institutional adoption.
A panel discussion on "The Essence of Ethereum" at ETH Dublin, featuring industry leaders in a ... More relaxed conversation format typical of crypto conferences.
Crypto succeeded by serving user desires rather than imposing ideological goals. The revolution arrived quietly through practical applications, not just manifestos about sovereign individuals, but apps that let people speculate on their phones. Not decentralized utopias for the techno-literate, but centralized solutions like Base that actually work for everyday users.
The global nature of the crypto community remains its greatest strength. Attendees understand cross-border financial friction from lived experience, driving practical solutions for real problems like credit score portability and international payments. Their perspectives come from navigating multiple financial systems, not theoretical knowledge. Seven years of development have taught the Ethereum community hard lessons about the gap between technological possibility and human adoption patterns. The most successful technologies rarely fulfill their creators' original visions; instead, they find unexpected applications that prove more valuable than anyone anticipated.
As crypto conferences continue grappling with the same fundamental questions, perhaps the persistence of these conversations isn't a failure, it's recognition that some problems are worth discussing for decades because they're genuinely important (and difficult) to solve. The revolution may not have arrived as promised, but evolution continues daily, one practical application at a time.
The community's maturation from revolutionary idealism to pragmatic incrementalism might disappoint early believers, but it represents natural growth. What struck me most about ETH Dublin wasn't the technology discussions, but how much everyone genuinely loved the community itself. The conversations were deeply introspective, with attendees reflecting not just on code and protocols, but on meaning and purpose.
In many ways, crypto has become a secular religion for the 21st century, a rare space where young people can gather to earnestly discuss how to improve the world and actually build solutions. It's one of the few communities that combines philosophical idealism with practical engineering, offering both a sense of purpose and a path to create change. The hackathon projects weren't just technical exercises; they were expressions of hope about fixing real problems, from reducing doom-scrolling to enabling fair fundraising.
Paul Dylan Ennis, with his Ethereum tattoo and academic credentials, embodies this evolution in a unique way. He studies these communities professionally, intimately aware of the nuances of bitcoin governance discussions and the internal politics and drama that most Bitcoin ETF holders never see. His sci-fi essay wasn't just a thought experiment; it was a sprawling academic paper disguised as (amateur) fantasy fiction, exploring how the world transforms as crypto's influence grows. The movement may have evolved beyond its original vision, but it has retained something perhaps more valuable: a community that still believes technology can make the world better, and is willing to spend their weekends proving it.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

AI startups revolutionize coding industry, leading to sky-high valuations
AI startups revolutionize coding industry, leading to sky-high valuations

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

AI startups revolutionize coding industry, leading to sky-high valuations

By Anna Tong and Krystal Hu SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) -Two years after the launch of ChatGPT, return on investment in generative AI has been elusive, but one area stands out: software development. So-called code generation or 'code-gen' startups are commanding sky-high valuations as corporate boardrooms look to use AI to aid, and sometimes to replace, expensive human software engineers. Cursor, a code generation startup based in San Francisco that can suggest and complete lines of code and write whole sections of code autonomously, raised $900 million at a $10 billion valuation in May from a who's who list of tech investors, including Thrive Capital, Andreessen Horowitz and Accel. Windsurf, a Mountain View-based startup behind the popular AI coding tool Codeium, attracted the attention of ChatGPT maker OpenAI, which is now in talks to acquire the company for $3 billion, sources familiar with the matter told Reuters. Its tool is known for translating plain English commands into code, sometimes called 'vibe coding,' which allows people with no knowledge of computer languages to write software. OpenAI and Windsurf declined to comment on the acquisition. 'AI has automated all the repetitive, tedious work,' said Scott Wu, CEO of code gen startup Cognition. 'The software engineer's role has already changed dramatically. It's not about memorizing esoteric syntax anymore.' Founders of code-gen startups and their investors believe they are in a land grab situation, with a shrinking window to gain a critical mass of users and establish their AI coding tool as the industry standard. But because most are built on AI foundation models developed elsewhere, such as OpenAI, Anthropic, or DeepSeek, their costs per query are also growing, and none are yet profitable. They're also at risk of being disrupted by Google, Microsoft and OpenAI, which all announced new code-gen products in May, and Anthropic is also working on one as well, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters. The rapid growth of these startups is coming despite competing on big tech's home turf. Microsoft's GitHub Copilot, launched in 2021 and considered code-gen's dominant player, grew to over $500 million in revenue last year, according to a source familiar with the matter. Microsoft declined to comment on GitHub Copilot's revenue. On Microsoft's earnings call in April, the company said the product has over 15 million users. LEARN TO CODE? As AI revolutionizes the industry, many jobs - particularly entry-level coding positions that are more basic and involve repetition - may be eliminated. Signalfire, a VC firm that tracks tech hiring, found that new hires with less than a year of experience fell 24% in 2024, a drop it attributes to tasks once assigned to entry-level software engineers are now being fulfilled in part with AI. Google's CEO also said in April that 'well over 30%' of Google's code is now AI-generated, and Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said last year the company had saved 'the equivalent of 4,500 developer-years' by using AI. Google and Amazon declined to comment. In May, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said at a conference that approximately 20 to 30% of their code is now AI-generated. The same month, the company announced layoffs of 6,000 workers globally, with over 40% of those being software developers in Microsoft's home state, Washington. 'We're focused on creating AI that empowers developers to be more productive, creative, and save time,' a Microsoft spokesperson said. 'This means some roles will change with the revolution of AI, but human intelligence remains at the center of the software development life cycle.' MOUNTING LOSSES Some 'vibe-coding' platforms already boast substantial annualized revenues. Cursor, with just 60 employees, went from zero to $100 million in recurring revenue by January 2025, less than two years since its launch. Windsurf, founded in 2021, launched its code generation product in November 2024 and is already bringing in $50 million in annualized revenue, according to a source familiar with the company. But both startups operate with negative gross margins, meaning they spend more than they make, according to four investor sources familiar with their operations. 'The prices people are paying for coding assistants are going to get more expensive,' Quinn Slack, CEO at coding startup Sourcegraph, told Reuters. Both Cursor and Windsurf are led by recent MIT graduates in their twenties, and exemplify the gold rush era of the AI startup scene. 'I haven't seen people working this hard since the first Internet boom,' said Martin Casado, a general partner at Andreessen Horowitz, an investor in Anysphere, the company behind Cursor. What's less clear is whether the dozen or so code-gen companies will be able to hang on to their customers as big tech moves in. 'In many cases, it's less about who's got the best technology -- it's about who is going to make the best use of that technology, and who's going to be able to sell their products better than others,' said Scott Raney, managing director at Redpoint Ventures, whose firm invested in Sourcegraph and Poolside, a software development startup that's building its own AI foundation model. CUSTOM AI MODELS Most of the AI coding startups currently rely on the Claude AI model from Anthropic, which crossed $3 billion in annualized revenue in May in part due to fees paid by code-gen companies. But some startups are attempting to build their own models. In May, Windsurf announced its first in-house AI models that are optimized for software engineering in a bid to control the user experience. Cursor has also hired a team of researchers to pre-train its own large frontier-level models, which could enable the company to not have to pay foundation model companies so much money, according to two sources familiar with the matter. Startups looking to train their own AI coding models face an uphill battle as it could easily cost millions to buy or rent the computing capacity needed to train a large language model. Replit earlier dropped plans to train its own model. Poolside, which has raised more than $600 million to make a coding-specific model, has announced a partnership with Amazon Web Services and is testing with customers, but hasn't made any product generally available yet. Another code gen startup Magic Dev, which raised nearly $500 million since 2023, told investors a frontier-level coding model was coming in summer 2024 but hasn't yet launched a product. Poolside declined to comment. Magic Dev did not respond to a request for comment.

The Wiretap: Trump Says Goodbye To The AI Safety Institute
The Wiretap: Trump Says Goodbye To The AI Safety Institute

Forbes

timean hour ago

  • Forbes

The Wiretap: Trump Says Goodbye To The AI Safety Institute

The Wiretap is your weekly digest of cybersecurity, internet privacy and surveillance news. To get it in your inbox, subscribe here. (Photo by Jim WATSON / AFP) (Photo by JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images) The Trump administration has announced plans to reorganize the U.S. AI Safety Institute (AISI) into the new Center for AI Standards and Innovation (CAISI). Set up by the Biden administration in 2023, AISI operated within the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) to research risks in widely-used AI systems like OpenAI's ChatGPT or Anthropic's Claude. The move to dismantle the body had been expected for some time. In February, as JD Vance headed to France for a major AI summit, his delegation did not include anyone from the AI Safety Institute, Reuters reported at the time. The agency's inaugural director Elizabeth Kelly had stepped down earlier in the month. The Commerce Department's announcement marking the change is thin on details about the reorganization, but it appears the aim is to favor innovation over red tape. 'For far too long, censorship and regulations have been used under the guise of national security. Innovators will no longer be limited by these standards. CAISI will evaluate and enhance U.S. innovation of these rapidly developing commercial AI systems while ensuring they remain secure to our national security standards,' said Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick. What could be gleaned from Lutnick's paradoxical phrasing – national security-focused standards are limiting, but America needs national security-focused standards – is that it's very difficult to tell just how much the new body will differ from the old one. The announcement goes on to state that CAISI will 'assist industry to develop voluntary standards' in AI, which summed up much of what the old body did. Similarly, just as the AI Safety Institute was tasked with assessing risks in artificial intelligence, CAISI will 'lead unclassified evaluations of AI capabilities that may pose risks to national security.' CAISI will also still be a part of NIST. And, despite Lutnick's apparent disdain for standards, the Commerce press release concludes that CAISI will 'ensure U.S. dominance of international AI standards.' That there's little obvious change between the Institute and CAISI might alleviate any immediate concerns the U.S. is abandoning commitments to keep AI safe. Just earlier this year, a coalition of companies, nonprofits and academics called on Congress to codify the Institute's existence before the year was up. That included major players like OpenAI and Anthropic, both of which had agreements to work with the agency on research projects. What happens to those is now up in the air. The Commerce Department hadn't responded to a series of questions at the time of publication, and NIST declined to comment. Got a tip on surveillance or cybercrime? Get me on Signal at +1 929-512-7964. (Photo by Melina Mara-Pool/Getty Images) Unknown individuals have impersonated President Trump's chief of staff Susie Wiles in calls and texts to Republican lawmakers and business executives. Investigators suspect the perpetrators used artificial intelligence to clone Wiles' voice. One lawmaker was asked by the impersonator to assemble a list of individuals for potential presidential pardons, according to the Wall Street Journal. It's unclear that motives lay behind the impersonation, or how they pulled the stunt off. Wiles had told confidantes that some of her contacts from her personal phone had been stolen by a hacker. A Texas police officer searched Flock Safety's AI-powered surveillance camera network to track down a woman who had carried out a self-administered abortion, 404 Media reports. Because the search was conducted across different states, experts raised concerns about police using Flock to track down individuals getting abortions in states where it's legal before going back home to a state where it's illegal. The cops said they were simply worried about the woman's safety. Nathan Vilas Laatsch, a 28-year-old IT specialist at the Defense Intelligence Agency, has been arrested and charged with leaking state secrets after becoming upset at the Trump administration. The DOJ did not specify to which country Laatsch allegedly tried to pass secrets, sources told the Washington Post it was Germany. He was caught out by undercover agents posing as interested parties, according to the DOJ. Europol announced it had identified more than 2,000 links 'pointing to jihadist and right-wing violent extremist and terrorist propaganda targeting minors.' The agency warned that it had seen terrorists using AI to generate content like short videos and memes 'designed to resonate with younger audiences.' A 63-year-old British man, John Miller, was charged alongside a Chinese national by the Department of Justice with conspiring to ship missiles, air defense radar, drones and unspecified 'cryptographic devices' to China. They're also charged with trying to stalk and harass an individual who was planning protests against Chinese president Xi.

Will new nuclear energy deals generate FOMO mentality in Big Tech?
Will new nuclear energy deals generate FOMO mentality in Big Tech?

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Will new nuclear energy deals generate FOMO mentality in Big Tech?

Constellation Energy (CEG) has inked a 20-year deal to provide tech giant Meta Platforms (META) with power from its clean nuclear energy plant starting in 2027. Mizuho Americas managing director and senior analyst of utilities Anthony Crowdell discusses the Constellation-Meta deal, as well as other energy agreements as grid demand soars to power AI data centers, and the regulation around nuclear plants after President Trump signed an executive order in May to ease restrictions around nuclear reactor development. Catch Yahoo Finance's interview with Nano Nuclear Energy founder, executive chairman, and president Jay Yu on the nuclear energy landscape. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination here. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store