Artificial intelligence has restructured many industries. And every time AI advances, the question that inevitably arises is, 'Will it replace humans?' In the cryptocurrency industry as well, the impact is already visible, from AI-driven trading bots to agent-based trading systems.
However, Nansen's CEO and co-founder Alex Svanevik points out that AI is not a substitute for human judgment, but rather a reinforcement. In an exclusive interview with BeInCrypto, CEO Svanevik detailed this change and provided insights into the future of AI-driven analysis.
AI Debate in the Cryptocurrency Industry: Nansen CEO Advocates for AI as a Complement to Humans.
Nansen announced the launch of AI-powered on-chain trading features on January 21. This marks a significant turning point from a purely analytical platform to a product that integrates insights and execution.
With new features built on a proprietary dataset foundation of over 500 million labeled wallets, users can manage portfolios, interpret on-chain signals in real time, and receive data-backed suggestions. Furthermore, it has now become possible to execute trades directly on Nansen.
Nansen AI, trained and evaluated on Nansen's unique dataset, consistently outperforms leading AI products in benchmarks designed for on-chain analysis and transaction cases. This provides traders and investors with more accurate insights that are directly related to real transactions and can transform agent-based intelligence into practical trading advantages.
Furthermore, this release realizes a new approach that Nansen calls 'Vibe Trading.' This is described as a way to intuitively transition from insights to on-chain execution without switching tools.
As the scope of AI analysis expands, the role of human analysts is being questioned. CEO Svanevik mentioned that AI excels at large-scale information processing, analyzing hundreds of millions of wallets, tracking fund flows between chains, and identifying patterns that are difficult for humans to detect.
However, he emphasized that the final decision-making lies with the user, and it is humans who ask the right questions and give approval for actions.
The boundaries are not fixed. As AI's reasoning capabilities improve and on-chain data becomes richer, the boundaries will also change. However, the goal is not to replace judgment. It is to free humans from mundane tasks so they can focus on more advanced decision-making.
Conditions for Trustworthy Analysis in the AI-Driven Cryptocurrency Market
Research suggests that an increasing dependence on AI tools may lead to a decline in critical thinking skills. This is particularly important in the cryptocurrency market, where extreme volatility and high-risk assets must be navigated.
However, CEO Svanevik expressed a different view. He stated that 'excellent AI' brings more signals to the surface, prompting users to think more critically about the execution aspects.
The fundamental risk is that everyone rushes to the same strategy. This is not unique to AI and is common among human analysts as well. The solution is diversity — the diversification of models, strategies, and data interpretation is necessary. Our company aims to build tools that allow for individual judgment rather than following a single oracle.
He also stressed that neither AI nor human analysts should be trusted unconditionally. According to him, what matters is whether the analysis is consistently valid over time.
The CEO explained how to measure reliability in an AI-focused market.
The reliability in the AI-driven era is determined not by names or social media follower counts, but by measurement and iteration. AI can conduct tests against reality on a scale that is impossible for humans. This is where AI's strength lies.
The simplest evaluation method is practical, in which users pose important questions for themselves and determine whether the answers hold solid grounds for validity, usefulness, and feasibility. Users tend to effectively judge the quality.
In the long term, trust will shift from individual analysts to platforms that can consistently provide signals and reduce noise. We also pursue that standard.
Even if AI can analyze on-chain data, human belief cannot be replaced.
Human analysts make trading decisions based on a combination of multiple signals, including on-chain indicators and price data, while AI relies on patterns learned from past data.
When asked if AI could possess similar judgment in the future, CEO Svanevik replied, 'While it may not be the same as human intuition, it is likely possible.'
He elaborated that AI requires a unique contextual reasoning ability. He believes that AI can integrate live data with a breadth of variables that humans cannot track and make judgments more effectively.
Achieving this requires better training data, longer context windows, and feedback loops from real operations. Our agents are already showing signs of this. It is not just pattern recognition; they are inferring real-time behavioral data. This is an initial stage of judgment, and it will become sharper through the evolution of models and learning from tens of millions of on-chain transactions.
However, it was pointed out that there are elements in on-chain analysis that AI can never fully replace. That is, being accountable for decision-making under uncertainty.
CEO Svanevik stated that while AI can present patterns, probabilities, and scenarios and evaluate what has happened or what could happen based on data, it cannot take on the personal responsibility of decision-making regarding risk tolerance, values, and adverse outcomes.
On-chain analysis ultimately influences real-world behavior — capital investment, team support, public declarations of intent. There needs to be an entity that is accountable for those decisions, which is the role of humans.
He emphasized that no matter how advanced AI models become, reliability in terms of judgment, accountability, and belief will continue to rest with humans. AI can provide information for decision-making, but ultimately, it is humans who make the decisions and are accountable for the outcomes.
Deciding what to prioritize is crucial. AI can tell you what is happening on-chain, but it cannot tell you what to focus on. That is a matter of sense, belief, and is inherently human.
Ultimately, Mr. Svanevik views AI not as a decision-maker but as a powerful assistant. AI can present patterns, probabilities, and insights at an unprecedented scale, but human judgment remains central regarding risks, accountability, and beliefs.
As AI analysis becomes more mainstream, the platform that can continually prove the quality of its insights will gain trust. Meanwhile, humans will still play the role of determining what is important and being accountable for the outcomes.