On February 14, 2026, Vitalik Buterin publicly voiced his concerns, directly pointing out that the current crypto prediction market is being hijacked by short-term speculation and high-frequency gambling. He emphasized that existing products are overly designed around price volatility of cryptocurrencies and betting on sports events, deviating from the societal functions that prediction markets should fulfill. In this statement, Vitalik’s core solution is not merely to restrict “gambling tendencies,” but to reconstruct prediction markets into a broadly defined risk hedging tool, allowing users to manage future uncertainties concerning real assets and living expenses. This shift in perspective challenges the long-standing dominant narrative in crypto finance of “quick money” and “high-stakes gambling,” and plants the seeds for potential innovations in the next round of application layers.
How Casino-like Prediction Markets Have Stepped Off Course
● High Dopamine Lock-in of Product Structure: The current mainstream prediction markets heavily depend on certain themes for traffic and revenue—short-term price direction of crypto assets, short-term macroeconomic trends, and outcomes from clearly defined, quickly settled events such as sports competitions. These products inherently provide instant feedback and strong stimulation, as platforms further amplify the “casino experience” through high-frequency launches, short-term settlements, and amplified odds fluctuations, making users more focused on short-term excitement and odds games rather than information discovery and risk management.
● Vitalik’s Critique of Short-term Speculation: According to sources A/C, Vitalik candidly pointed out that many current prediction markets “overly rely on products with high dopamine attributes, such as cryptocurrency price fluctuations and sports betting,” essentially turning into online gambling wrapped in an on-chain shell. He believes this model not only leads users to slide into a purely betting mindset in terms of risk perception, but also causes developers to design incentives around chip stacking, rather than building mechanisms to help individuals and institutions manage future uncertainties better.
● Conspiracy of User Profile and Product Incentives: With high volatility and high odds presenting financial temptations, the early user base naturally concentrates on those who prefer gambling and short-term speculation. Platforms then iterate their interfaces and rules based on the preferences of this core user group, continually reinforcing the gambling attributes. The result is a mutual feedback loop between participant structure and product design, further diluting social value, reducing information aggregation and public risk management capabilities to mere accessories, laying a stark contrast for later comparisons with traditional financial hedging tools.
● Deviation from Traditional Hedging Tools: In traditional finance, tools like futures, options, and swaps, while also subject to speculation, are designed to help businesses and investors hedge against commodity price, interest rate, and exchange rate fluctuations. In contrast, casino-like prediction markets rarely start from “who is using it to hedge what risks,” but instead trace back from “how to get more people to place bets.” This structural difference has widened the gap between prediction markets and mainstream financial infrastructures.
From Betting Outcomes to Hedging Life Bill Risks
● Advocating for Services Addressing Real Assets and Expenditure Risks: In this statement, Vitalik’s core view is that prediction markets “should serve as a tool to reduce risks associated with assets or real expenditures” (according to sources A/C), shifting the focus from abstract outcome guessing to risk exposure directly related to real asset prices and individual future expenditures. Whether it’s rent, tuition, or future medical costs, he hopes prediction markets can help users lock in and diversify these fluctuations on-chain in advance.
● Paradigm Shift: From Betting to Smoothing Expenditures: The traditional casino logic is “win more chips by guessing outcomes right,” with earnings coming from defeating opponents or platforms; whereas Vitalik envisions another paradigm—through contract design, allowing users to form some sort of “insurance-like” hedge on their future expenditures. For ordinary users, the significance shifts from whether they can seize a chance to get rich quickly to whether they can make key bills over the next several years predictable and manageable in an environment of inflation and severe price volatility, thereby dispersing uncertainties through collective speculation.
● Collision of Financial Infrastructure Narratives and Gaming Narratives: When prediction markets are viewed as financial infrastructure, their goal is to improve overall risk distribution efficiency in society, requiring stable participation, long-term funding pools, and rigorous mechanism design; while when seen as gaming platforms, the focus shifts to maximizing user retention and betting frequency. The two narratives differ significantly in priorities regarding business metrics, compliance considerations, and technical pathways, explaining why Vitalik emphasizes the fundamental conflict between the current landscape and his idealized positioning of “risk hedging layers.”
● Media Interpretation of Risks and Returning to Original Contexts: Some media outlets, in reporting on this, tend to simplify “reducing speculation and increasing risk management” to “prediction markets should become insurance companies” or “directly replace traditional derivatives markets,” which may exaggerate misunderstandings. Given that relevant reports contain risks of semantic simplification or even distortion (marked as information pending verification in briefings), it is crucial to return to his original context when understanding Vitalik's advocacy: he proposes a change in direction and purpose, rather than offering a ready-made institutional blueprint.
Locally Powered AI for Personal Future Expenditures...
● Local AI and the Concept of a “Future Expenditure Basket”: According to source C, Vitalik further proposed using locally running AI to build personalized “future expenditure baskets” for each user. This basket is not an abstract budget sheet, but one that predicts key expense ranges for the future based on multidimensional data such as past consumption records, income structure, price levels in the city of residence, and life stages, thereby providing input parameters and weight references for subsequent on-chain risk hedging operations.
● From Expenditure Baskets to Collections of Hedgeable Events: Once personal future expenditures are deconstructed into structured “baskets”—such as categories for housing, education, healthcare, transportation, food, etc.—they can be mapped to a series of price or event risks that need hedging, rather than simple outcome speculation. For example, rent fluctuates with the city housing price index, tuition follows the education inflation index, and medical costs are influenced by drug prices or policy changes. Prediction markets can issue contracts around these indices or events, allowing users to hedge against the upward risks of future bills by holding corresponding positions.
● Insights on Privacy, Local Computing, and On-Chain Product Design: A key point of this approach is “local AI,” meaning that the prediction and modeling process is completed on the user's device, with the chain only receiving aggregated parameters confirmed by users, thereby reducing the leakage of sensitive consumption data. For DeFi and on-chain derivative design, this suggests that products may revolve around new forms such as “indexed expenditure baskets” or “living cost-linked contracts,” which must also deeply integrate with privacy protection technologies and local computing frameworks, providing a fresh source of inspiration for future protocol designs.
● Current Lack of Mathematical Models and Implementation Details: It is essential to clarify that what Vitalik presently outlines is more of a directional concept rather than an engineered solution. Briefings point out that specific mathematical models for the relevant hedging mechanisms, settlement rules, incentive compatibility designs, and other details have not been made public, and there is no fully verified technology path available for large-scale replication. Preventing readers from mistakenly believing that a “ready-made Vitalik-style hedging protocol” has already emerged in the market is crucial for assessing the current narrative stage and potential risks.
Whale Movements and Wall Street Optimism...
● Dramatic Background of Whale Movements and Bearish Sentiments on the Same Day: According to source A, on the same day Vitalik spoke out, significant whale movements in the Bitcoin market spurred intense debates among traders regarding short-term trends, and bearish sentiments quickly escalated on social platforms and derivative markets. Funds were maneuvered back and forth in the contract market, with discussions almost entirely centered on “the next K-line” rather than “the next round of risk structure.” Discussing the social functions of prediction markets in such a context adds a strong dramatic sense to this narrative conflict.
● Weakening of the Dollar and Macro Contrast with Risk Assets: Similarly, according to source A, JPMorgan analysts still believe that in a context of a weakening dollar, risk assets remain attractive in the medium to long term. This “Wall Street optimism” starkly contrasts with the panic in the market regarding extreme price fluctuations of single assets in the short term: the macro narrative emphasizes multi-year risk rewards and asset allocations, while speculative positions only care whether liquidation will happen in the next few hours, reflecting a division in timeframes, which also mirrors how prediction markets are used and designed.
● Large Transfers of COMP and Disclosure of Anti Fund Assets: Source A also noted that visible large transfers of COMP on-chain, as well as the disclosure of Anti Fund’s asset scale, added another layer of notes to the market sentiment on that day. They represent typical “profit-seeking capital” behavior: whether it’s project chip liquidity or asset allocation of emerging funds, hedging or not often bows to profit maximization. Compared to Vitalik’s advocated order of “defining the social and personal risks to hedge first, then discussing the profit structure,” this practical reality appears particularly utilitarian and shortsighted.
● Current Conflict between Speculative Sentiments and Long-term Risk Management Visions: On one side are instant speculations surrounding whale movements and token transfers, and on the other, a vision attempting to bind prediction markets to personal living costs and long-term economic risks. Not only do their time scales differ, but their value judgments are almost opposite: the former rewards information asymmetry and short-term responsiveness, while the latter seeks to make risk-bearing more equitable and predictable through publicly transparent contracts and indices. This conflict forms an important backdrop for why Vitalik chose to redefine the significance of prediction markets at this time.
Community Reactions and the Crypto Narrative Shifting from Quick Earnings...
● Discussion Popularity and Spread: According to source C, Vitalik’s relevant remarks sparked broad discussions in the community, with related posts receiving hundreds of likes and shares on social platforms. Although accurate interaction data is lacking, it sufficiently proves that this topic resonates strongly among developers, traders, and ordinary users, leading different circles to gather around inquiries about “who prediction markets should serve and what problems they should solve,” gradually forming a collective reflection on the industry’s self-positioning.
● Supporters: From Speculative Machines to Public Risk Tools: Supporters argue that upgrading prediction markets into public tools addressing risks of inflation, education, healthcare, etc., is a necessary path for crypto to move from a “digital casino” to real economic infrastructure. In their view, designing contracts linked to living costs and social welfare gaps can provide some decentralized “buffer layer” for vulnerable groups, allowing risk management capabilities not to be exclusive to a few with financial advisors and complex derivative channels.
● Skeptics: Concerns About Liquidity and Business Model Damage: Opponents worry that once the narratives around gambling and high returns are weakened, the liquidity and commercial attractiveness of prediction markets may significantly decline. Many project operators currently rely on transaction fees and market-making revenues from high-frequency speculation for survival, while products aimed at long-term risk hedging often have slower paces, higher educational costs, and more complex profit structures. Skeptics believe that transitioning too early may exacerbate the already challenging business model before regulatory pressures and compliance uncertainties are clarified.
● From High-Leverage Playgrounds to Risk Management Infrastructure: The deeper layer of this debate is whether the entire crypto industry wants to define itself as a “high-leverage playground” or a “global risk management infrastructure.” The former excels at creating popular narratives and short-cycle wealth effects, while the latter demands longer development cycles, stricter self-discipline, and more complex interactions with regulations. Vitalik’s comments serve as a route choice question within the community: before the next cycle arrives, is the industry willing to sacrifice some immediate stimulation for higher social functions?
The Next Act of Prediction Markets: Under Regulatory Shadows...
Summarizing Vitalik's proposition, its core is to shift prediction markets from the casino model of “guessing outcomes to win chips” to a risk hedging layer embedded in real asset and living expenditure scenarios. Whether through locally AI-driven construction of personal future expenditure baskets or designing indexed contracts around key bills in housing, education, and healthcare, the aim is to provide individuals and society with more agency amid economic fluctuations, rather than being swept along by price waves.
Nonetheless, looking at the current progress, this vision remains in the early consensus and directional proposal phase. Briefings explicitly state that there is currently a lack of public mathematical models to describe how these hedging mechanisms can achieve balance in terms of incentive compatibility, reliable settlement, and resistance to manipulation, nor is there a large-scale replicable technological implementation path available. The industry still has a long way to go in institutional design and product iteration before truly turning prediction markets into “life bill hedging infrastructure.”
Looking ahead, whether the reconstruction of prediction markets can transition from concept to product will be influenced by multiple factors, including regulatory and compliance frameworks, the maturity of local AI and privacy computing technologies, and whether traditional financial institutions are willing to adopt such tools. Under regulatory shadows, proving one’s positive role in social risk management without being simply categorized as “online gambling” will be a question that project teams must address.
The author’s inclination is towards the judgment that, in the short term, casino-like prediction markets will still dominate liquidity and discourse, and the demand for speculative positions will not ebb due to a single discussion. However, the narrative proposed by Vitalik is very likely to be reactivated in the next cycle—when AI, local computing, and compliance infrastructures become more mature, the story of “using prediction markets to hedge life expenses” may become the starting point for a new generation of product and protocol innovations, while today’s debate is logically and valuably laying the groundwork for that scene.
Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Welfare 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。
