Bittensor founder targets full decentralization within 18 months

Bittensor founder targets full decentralization within 18 months

Jacob Steeves lays out a roadmap to hand over control of the AI protocol by December 2027, after months of governance criticism and a high-profile network exit

Bittensor co-founder Jacob Steeves wants the protocol he helped build to no longer need him. The man known as “Const” in crypto circles has published a roadmap to fully decentralize Bittensor within 18 months, targeting a completion date around December 2027.

The decentralization deficit

Bittensor, co-founded by Steeves and Ala Shaabana, has built genuine decentralized ownership among its participants over more than five years of operation. The network currently runs 128 active subnet teams and more than 20 core validator teams.

But ownership and control are not the same thing. Bittensor’s governance structure has relied on what’s been called a “triumvirate” model, and critics have argued it concentrates too much power in too few hands. The core team’s grip on the economic incentive layer, the mechanism that determines how rewards flow through the network, has been a persistent sore point.

Advertisement

That criticism reached a boiling point in April 2026 when Covenant AI, a participant in the Bittensor ecosystem, exited the network entirely. Covenant AI accused the protocol of “decentralization theatre,” alleging unilateral control by Steeves over key network decisions. TAO’s price dropped roughly 18-20% in the aftermath.

The roadmap: what Steeves is actually proposing

Steeves’ plan isn’t a single flip-the-switch moment. He’s outlined a phased approach that touches several core components of how Bittensor operates.

First, the roadmap calls for raising validator competition. Second, the plan includes implementing bidirectional liquidity pools. Third, Steeves wants to introduce a conviction-based voting mechanism for Alpha token holders. This type of system weights votes based on how long a holder commits their tokens, rewarding long-term alignment over short-term speculation.

The roadmap also includes updates to the TaoFlow algorithm, which governs how incentives are distributed across the network’s subnets.

Steeves resigned as CEO of the Opentensor Foundation in February 2026, months before announcing this roadmap. The move was explicitly framed as reducing key-person dependency.

What this means for investors

For TAO holders, the roadmap addresses the single biggest governance risk that has weighed on the token. The April 2026 price drop following Covenant AI’s departure demonstrated how directly governance concerns translate into market impact.

The conviction-based voting mechanism deserves particular attention from investors. If implemented correctly, it could create a structural incentive for longer-term holding, reducing sell pressure and rewarding patient capital. If implemented poorly, it could entrench existing large holders and create a new form of centralization dressed in governance clothing.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Bittensor founder targets full decentralization within 18 months

Bittensor founder targets full decentralization within 18 months

Jacob Steeves lays out a roadmap to hand over control of the AI protocol by December 2027, after months of governance criticism and a high-profile network exit

Bittensor co-founder Jacob Steeves wants the protocol he helped build to no longer need him. The man known as “Const” in crypto circles has published a roadmap to fully decentralize Bittensor within 18 months, targeting a completion date around December 2027.

The decentralization deficit

Bittensor, co-founded by Steeves and Ala Shaabana, has built genuine decentralized ownership among its participants over more than five years of operation. The network currently runs 128 active subnet teams and more than 20 core validator teams.

But ownership and control are not the same thing. Bittensor’s governance structure has relied on what’s been called a “triumvirate” model, and critics have argued it concentrates too much power in too few hands. The core team’s grip on the economic incentive layer, the mechanism that determines how rewards flow through the network, has been a persistent sore point.

Advertisement

That criticism reached a boiling point in April 2026 when Covenant AI, a participant in the Bittensor ecosystem, exited the network entirely. Covenant AI accused the protocol of “decentralization theatre,” alleging unilateral control by Steeves over key network decisions. TAO’s price dropped roughly 18-20% in the aftermath.

The roadmap: what Steeves is actually proposing

Steeves’ plan isn’t a single flip-the-switch moment. He’s outlined a phased approach that touches several core components of how Bittensor operates.

First, the roadmap calls for raising validator competition. Second, the plan includes implementing bidirectional liquidity pools. Third, Steeves wants to introduce a conviction-based voting mechanism for Alpha token holders. This type of system weights votes based on how long a holder commits their tokens, rewarding long-term alignment over short-term speculation.

The roadmap also includes updates to the TaoFlow algorithm, which governs how incentives are distributed across the network’s subnets.

Steeves resigned as CEO of the Opentensor Foundation in February 2026, months before announcing this roadmap. The move was explicitly framed as reducing key-person dependency.

What this means for investors

For TAO holders, the roadmap addresses the single biggest governance risk that has weighed on the token. The April 2026 price drop following Covenant AI’s departure demonstrated how directly governance concerns translate into market impact.

The conviction-based voting mechanism deserves particular attention from investors. If implemented correctly, it could create a structural incentive for longer-term holding, reducing sell pressure and rewarding patient capital. If implemented poorly, it could entrench existing large holders and create a new form of centralization dressed in governance clothing.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.