As of now, regarding Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin's prediction that "bug-free code will emerge in the 2030s," mainstream asset prices and trading volumes have not shown any quantifiable abnormal fluctuations, nor has there been a clear shift in capital flow. This suggests that this time it is more like a long-term anchor about a technological paradigm shift, rather than a short-term market catalyst that can be directly traded. In the absence of price signals, investors need to examine the potential impact of this information from three dimensions: security narrative, capital structure, and governance logic.

Core of the Event

On December 24, 2025, at 20:56 UTC+8, Vitalik Buterin expressed his views on social media, stating that the long-held belief that "bugs are inevitable, and you cannot write bug-free code" will no longer hold in the 2030s. He further added that when developers consciously prioritize "bug-free" over functional increments, achieving bug-free code will become "feasible" in certain scenarios, rather than remaining at the theoretical hypothesis level. It is important to emphasize that Vitalik's statement is conditional: a large amount of software will still tolerate bugs in the trade-off of "functionality first," but will be able to pursue a higher level of reliability for critical systems "when needed."

From a direct impact perspective, this judgment has not yet been amplified by any on-chain data, price fluctuations, or official roadmaps, but rather reflects an extension of his consistent technical view: that Ethereum, DeFi, and the broader crypto infrastructure are gradually shifting from "minimizing accidents" to "pursuing provable reliability at specific levels."

Breakdown of Views

This statement was quickly relayed by media such as Foresight News, forming two core interpretations. One focuses on Vitalik's own conditional limitations: @VitalikButerin's original words indicate that "bug-free code" can only become a reality in the 2030s if we are willing to sacrifice some functional increments and elevate "avoiding bugs" to a primary goal. This position does not contradict the traditional software engineering logic that "perfection is the enemy of efficiency," but rather delineates the boundaries of engineering at different security levels.

The other interpretation comes from some developers and engineers' skepticism. They point out that the state space of complex systems expands exponentially with modules and interactions, and even as formal verification tools mature, it is difficult to cover all operating environments, dependencies, and human misuse scenarios. In their view, adjusting "bug-free" from an "impossible proposition" to "technically achievable" can easily be misinterpreted by the external market as a commitment to "absolute safety," thereby raising retail investors' blind trust in black-box protocols.

Therefore, this debate is essentially not about "whether to pursue safety," but rather "which layer of the system, at what cost and sacrifice, should be pushed towards what level of verifiable safety." Supporters see an efficiency leap in AI assistance, formal verification, and security toolchains; skeptics worry that complexity, changing requirements, and human factors will always keep "bug-free" confined to specific scenarios rather than generalizing to the entire software world.

Interwoven Narratives

If we place this prediction back into the context of Vitalik's statements over the past year, we find that it is not an isolated viewpoint, but rather a convergence of three narratives.

The first line is the ongoing optimization of Ethereum's underlying security and verifiability. From EIP-7864 attempting to address contract size limitations and encouraging more controllable contract complexity, to his repeated discussions on wallet recovery mechanisms and key management security design, it is evident that Vitalik is intentionally tightening the risk window of the "infrastructure layer," leaving more risk for upper-layer applications to bear. By anchoring bug-free code to the 2030s, it further emphasizes that underlying protocols and key contracts should not remain in a "patchwork" operational logic indefinitely.

The second line is about a middle path for AI and computational governance. He previously opposed a "one-size-fits-all pause on AI development," while proposing ideas like a "computational pause button," hoping to build a controllable and verifiable technical governance framework without destroying innovation momentum. This prediction regarding bug-free code resonates with this idea: AI should not only be an accelerator but also a part of the security and auditing tool stack, helping humans regain "provable" boundaries in systems of exploding complexity.

The third line extends the values of decentralization and transparency. Over the past year, Vitalik has repeatedly emphasized the role of prediction markets in "countering the emotional narratives of social media," proposing to use 0-1 probability constraints to force more objective judgments about reality; he has also criticized centralized social platforms for their black-box governance and abuse of power, advocating for enhanced algorithm transparency through a combination of ZK proofs and delayed open-sourcing. By positioning "bug-free code" as one of the technological goals for the next decade, it essentially aims to transform "system reliability" from trust in people to trust in auditable and verifiable code and protocol design.

In the intertwining of these three narratives, "bug-free code in the 2030s" appears more as a symbolic node of the crypto infrastructure's transition from a "patch economy" to "engineering-level reliability," rather than a singular technological breakthrough.

Deep Game Theory

Shifting the perspective from technology to game theory, we can see that the discussion about bug-free code is underpinned by a balance of multiple forces.

For public chains and DeFi infrastructure, pursuing a higher level of verifiable security means that changes to underlying protocols and core contracts will be more cautious, even shifting towards a "slower but steadier" iterative pace. This will directly affect the game space for developers and innovators: on one hand, more secure infrastructure helps attract long-term capital and compliant institutions, compressing systemic risk premiums; on the other hand, excessively high security thresholds and auditing costs may raise the trial-and-error barriers for new projects, making it harder for marginal innovations to land in the mainstream ecosystem.

For auditing institutions, security teams, and developer communities, this prediction is both a pressure and an opportunity. The pressure lies in the fact that the demand for "provable security" will force the industry to shift from "one-time audits before contract launch" to "verification and monitoring throughout the entire lifecycle"; the opportunity lies in that any team capable of productizing formal specifications, automated verification, and AI-assisted auditing capabilities may gain pricing power in the next round of security stack reconstruction.

For regulators and compliant funds, "bug-free code" will not directly change the regulatory framework, but it may change the baseline for risk pricing. From a traditional perspective, smart contracts are often viewed as "high-risk black boxes," requiring compensation through higher capital requirements and stricter risk disclosures. If a higher degree of verifiable security can be achieved at certain levels in the future, then regulatory bodies and institutional investors will have the motivation to differentiate "provably verified infrastructure" from "unverified experimental applications" in their rules, thereby promoting more detailed layered regulation for DeFi and on-chain settlements.

The core of this game is not about whether to have bug-free code, but rather who pays for security, at which level they pay, and how the security premium is redistributed among developers, users, and long-term capital.

Outlook

At this point in 2025, Vitalik's prediction about bug-free code in the 2030s serves more as a coordinate axis for the security narrative of the next decade, rather than an immediately realizable valuation-driven factor. In the coming years, what is truly worth tracking is not whether this prediction is repeatedly cited, but rather three specific indicators: first, whether Ethereum and mainstream public chains continue to tighten the pace of changes and strengthen verifiable design in underlying protocols and core contracts; second, whether the penetration of AI-assisted development and formal verification tools in auditing and development processes significantly increases; third, whether regulators and institutional funds begin to assign lower risk weights to "provably secure" protocols in their risk control models.

For investors, this event does not provide a simple bullish or bearish signal, but rather a long-term observation framework: whoever can turn "safety" from a slogan into a verifiable, priceable engineering capability will have the opportunity to achieve higher valuation multiples in the landscape of crypto infrastructure in the 2030s.

Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh

OKX benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。