Topic: Is Bitcoin for “Fake Rich”? - page 2. (Read 929 times)

I do believe that you are pessimistic and practical person, which can be observed from your tone and the level of details you provide to support your arguments, rather than simply "let's make the world a better place" So I really appreciate that. And yes, I do hope for human prosperity as you correctly noted. But I don't know, - unfortunately I don't believe that it is possible until we are all humans. That never happened in history, and I don't see it happening with us, until we are all humans in a common meaning. The things you describe are ally good and would benefit people overall, but "people are people".

Addressing your points one by one: "code is law" - correct, but someone needs to create the code, right? Same was with the laws. They were created by humans for humans to limit the ones who are not creators of the code/law. And as long as it's created by a real person - that person almost certainly will leave some "back door" for himself or for others to reset/cheat/game the code and laws. There can be reasons as to why s/he would do that, but the most simple one (among others) would be that this will give god-like feeling to the creator. On the contrary, if the code/laws are created by machine for humans - humans might accept that idea temporarily, but very soon there will raise those "activists" who will be screaming for their own minorities' rights that they are being discriminated for whatsoever reason by the code (like now people complain they cannot mine BTC with their CPU anymore), and that we as humans should not be ruled by artificially created system. Therefore, if that code (self-improving and intelligent I assume) sees such danger to the system overall, which will emerge due to manipulative human nature, or due to simple personal craziness of someone, will start to take down the ones who threaten the overall system (sounds like China's CCP partially because they do care for the social wellbeing of society and country overall, but ready to sacrifice individuals for the general good - and you know how much they are hated now because the ones who are taken down, are screaming the most loud).

And yes, Bitcoin is certainly not the best creation for now, but definitely was the #1 when it was the number one. It has issues with game theory, and with tech side as well, thus I think we both agree completely on this aspect.

The parallel co-existing systems with increasing/decreasing decentralisation partially remind me of the early societies in human history, and now partially some states. While if we look into the future we might see similar thing with corporatocracy, where the state=corporation. They all experienced similar features at some stage, but the result is where we are now. Trying to create a new system within a system. And if/when the proposed by you system will exist, don't you foresee it repeating the history of early societies, when we were hunter-gatherers? They also were pretty well decentralized, didn't have a central body in a sense to govern them, they also could enter/exit the system nearly at any will, and were rewarded and punished for good & bad actions. But overtime the systems, due to their nature (and maybe we can say due to the definition of "system", irrespective of its decentralization?) started either growing or collapsing due to their efficiencies, and overtime started to limit the entry/exit barriers. And now we all got citizenship, passports, local taxes, etc., etc. From the description (please correct me if I misunderstood you), what is proposed might seam like we just repeat the old history but on a new scale with the use of new technologies.

But as you correctly noted, all those societies and earlier experiments were mostly in pre-internet era, and were very tight to local geography. So with internet I believe yes, it can be overcome, yes - it can be done on a bigger scale, yes - people could join/leave it even more easily (until the gov sees the thread and shuts down the internet?), but in the result, wouldn't it be same as now but on a bigger scale? Like we won't have USA, China, Russia, UK, etc., but would have one global country / community where bad systems failed, the good one remained; where still will be left governors / (code developers in our case?), with the police authorities to monitor and watch and punish bad actors (irrespective if they are humans, robots or just some code), and local sub-systems of the global system, which will also function as the local countries do so now?

And last, but not the least, if the designed system is really that good and powerful and is able to change the world and status quo of the current elites, politicians, etc., they definitely wouldn't want to give up all what they got and start from 0 by earning credits for good actions... and with the resources they already have now, in materialistic world, I think they would have pretty good chance to stop it fairly quickly if they need to. While trying to take them and benefit them too in the new system, would gain create inequality as it is now, but in a different form, as for example if I am multi-billionaire now, you offer me to join a new system, I would reasonably want to preserve my status and my resources and my wealth, which means I again will be significantly superior to the other people?

All assets that are in demand are inflated. Think about it. If everyone sold their stocks at the same time the price would crash. If everyone sold their bitcoin at the same time the price would crash. If everyone sold their gold at the same time the price would crash. If everyone sold their houses in a certain area the price would crash in that area.

This is why things like market cap are not an accurate measure of value. Value demands on the health of the larger economy.


Interesting that you mention the first iPhones. Back in those days it truly was a revolutionary product with more utility than a Blackberry (another popular brand at the time) as evidenced by the fact that no smart phone nowadays has a physical keyboard.

Btw the original white design was meant to mimic the style of kitchen appliances, bathroom fixtures, and laundry machines. It was a way of communicating that the high price was justified because it was like buying something permanent that would last for years. Kind of a genius marketing decision that flew in the face of the cheap disposable electronics popular at the time.

Bitcoin is not a status symbol. It is not meant to be something you'll be flaunting to people's faces everytime you got to a date. It is not something you'll be bragging your friends about in a bar. If anything, bitcoin is a means to earn more money for people who are wanting to get out of their tiresome 9-5 shifts and on to something that offers more potential to earn and be financially literate at the same time.

First of all I have to admit I am a pessimist practical person. So if I tell the idea is feasible you should accept it
The fact that you wrote me such a long answer denotes that even you hope for human prosperity. we all know how poisoned the system is and how hard will be changes, but we have to cope with it or just sit and wait for things getting worse until die.
I prefer to “act”.

lets try to solve issues one by one.
You may heard “code is law”. Once we transformed our “good” rules and mechanisms to code and run our servers, the law will govern forever. Our good and fair law will dominant and defeat old mentality, like all “old mentalities” we missed because of technology dominant. This is the place that gradual changes takes place.

The Bitcoin “started for the good purpose and ended up being another speculative asset”. That’s true because it was first experience and Satoshi missed some points about its game theory. It doesn’t mean Bitcoin is must be the last experience. We can create a new better one. In fact we have to create a new one, to appreciate the idea of having center-less monetary system. We have to enrich this idea and enhance it to center-less governing as well. And we have to foreseen challenges. After one decade we are far mature than early Cypherpunks. aren't we?

"As long as there's a living system - be it human organized system, monetary system or something else - there's going to be decreasing entropy, thus increasing centralization over time."
That is true. The better way to say it is, all systems can tolerate a degree of entropy. If the entropy exceeds the tolerated level the system will collapse. Additionally all systems (either an organic system or a human organized system) tend to decrease entropy in order to increase its live.
So we have to follow these strategies.
1. design a system that tolerate maximum level of entropy and decentralization.
2. design more than one system simultaneously.  The systems are working independent and in parallel.
3. make it easy for people to enter and exit different systems with “no cost”.
4. the entire ecosystem (all different systems with different level of entropy and decentralization tolerate) enjoys the power of fragility and hardened by this fragility.
5. the last but not the least, at least one of these systems must start from super centralized structure and moves toward super decentralized system. This particular system is the backbone of the whole ecosystem. Day by day this system is more decentralized while the other systems can move toward more centralization or more decentralization.

"people will end up gaming any system and eventually even one single individual will either find benefit to cheat the system, or entirely out of craziness (as you said there are possible tools to motivate even bad actors to act good by benefiting them) will try to revenge against the new decentralized system and fill find supporters with enough brainwashing power, thus just again - increasing centralization."
Thanks for your insight and predicting these scenarios. So we have to deal with. That’s why we have to design more than one system simultaneously, and that’s why people must be able to enter and leave systems with no cost and that’s why the entire ecosystem is hardened by this “fragility”.
People will be free to enter a system (accept a money) or leave a system (do not validate that money) with less cost. The insight is, the weak game theories or insecure protocols or corrupted societies, or cheating monies must be destroyed as soon as possible. Before their money obtains a fake price, before they scam average people and before they accomplish the fraud, their money and their community will be disgraced. It is “the power of fragility”. Meanwhile the honest communities and coins will grownup and increase their population (believers) and raise up the value of their coins.

The idea of “new system with credit" context isn’t new and as you mentioned, they examined it before in different places and different times. Some of them were too successful and some failed. We already have different kind of “mutual” systems, reciprocate, parecon, time banks as well. We have also many local currencies -whole the glob- that are in action actually.
BTW what they are all missed is they are bind to a limited Geo-location and have narrow market and they are all suffer from high centralized administration, since all are created before internet era. Some of our systems can pick the best part of them and armed them with decentralized protocol. In such a case the adversaries can't stop them.

If we put enough incentives in our systems, people will abandon their common thinking, beliefs, history, norms, and systems and simply adapt to the new paradigm.

Well the gradual change is not possible I believe. It's like with cancer - you either put all forces to kill it quickly, or you wait and hope for gradual recovery while the cancer kills you slowly (by sucking up you into the system in our case). But under both conditions - with rapid change, people will fail as I described, and moreover, they will maintain old mentality, thus will just reconstruct the old system with new (hopefully at least this will change) elements. If the change is slow - it will suck people into the system, or the ones who can really resist will die over time (because single human's life is not enough to make such changes), or they will be noticed by the system-owners and be arrested or something else.

But yes, you have a great idea that "we need a “game theory” in which even evils prefer to chose good option. We must put these mechanisms in practice.". I would say that is not achievable, but I do believe that anything is achievable in this world. Thus, if you or someone could make that, I guess that person would be forever in the memory of humanity and be the greatest among the greatest among the ones who changed the world (as opposed to bshit spoken in public by billionaires).


Your point about Bitcoin is really great! That's the system that was started for the good purpose and ended up being another speculative asset played around by the "wanna be rich" and occasionally ripped off by the large BTC and/or fiat owners. Isn't that a reason to call it a tool for "fake rich" also, who use it with the hope to uplift their own social status, since we are all clear that its not used as it was designed to be used (at least among the majority)?

And I think the idea of decentralization is good, but, as long as there's a living system - be it human organized system, monetary system or something else - there's going to be decreasing entropy, thus increasing centralization over time. Only as system energy declines (i.e. system dies), entropy and decentralization will increase. This is partially the reason why I wouldn't agree with you that purely new monetary tool would solve the problem. With old brains (thoughts), but new tools, people will end up gaming any system and eventually even one single individual will either find benefit to cheat the system, or entirely out of craziness (as you said there are possible tools to motivate even bad actors to act good by benefiting them) will try to revenge against the new decentralized system and fill find supporters with enough brainwashing power, thus just again - increasing centralization.

And the new system with "credit" for good acts, instead of money, I believe was implemented once or twice in several places in the world (once was in some Russian village, and once elsewhere - I forgot where, but can find and share the link if you want). Though it was not entirely same with what you refer to, that was a test-society without money as we know it. However, based on conspiracy theories (I wasn't there so cannot confirm it's true or not ), but the experiment was forcibly stopped by local authorities, because it was too good and successful that it was threatening state sovereignty and pose a thread to the governors. So if that's the truth behind, I guess that tells a lot that such thing will find it very very hard to be implemented in real life, until we, as humans will abandon our common thinking, beliefs, history, norms, and systems, and by the time we do so - we probably stop to be humans as we used to be / created to be...

So you mean that Bitcoin is an investment asset of just another type of group of people then? Like someone prefers "white", and someone prefers "black"? - If that's the case (please correct me if I am wrong), it can be used as a supportive argument for my statement I guess. The "old rich" can be called "real rich" in the current moment, because measurement of their wealth existed for thousands of years. Bitcoin on the contrary emerged just recently and didn't obtain time-proven track record yet. Therefore, it is partially for "fake rich" as serves for another group of people to transit to the global elites (if they permit). And in the future, yes - maybe the Bitcoiners will be considered as "cool/advanced/real rech" and fiat-ones as outdated dinosaurs. But do we believe that the deeply rooted socio-financial-technological system that has established itself over thousands of years can be that easily overthrown before the Bitcoin dies with the emergence of quantum computing? Besides, there were other points I made in other comments regarding the pros vs. cons of BTC in the established system among the established elites.




What is Bitcoin itself then, or the Satoshis - aren't those numbers / digital codes?
And I guess those whom you describe who put all savings in BTC are the worst ones they aren't even that smart as the ones who pretend to be rich to join the "elites club".




Great words, but humanity had shown itself pretty well over the past decades and history... people never change, but tend to get worse. Therefore, as we say "hope for the best, prepare for the worst"




You are correct, however, what is the percentage of those people you describe?.. There are few people around the world who know about Bitcoin. Even less people actually understand it. Even less people understand the technology and philosophy behind. And even less are "in" not for the sake of quick profits. From my experience, I would say you are mentioning exceptions, who do exist, but are very rare overall.

All you explained here are true, except the solution itself. No one can change the system by revolution or overnight, neither we shouldn’t wish for it at all. The humankind examined all kind of revolution and reforms in last two centuries and almost all were failed.
Your simple solution is practiced many times and as you predicted truly, it will fail. Because the participators in this movement have to “scarify something” in order to “support some believes”.
The change must be gradual and must have benefit for participants and not punishment (something like early Bitcoin adapters). That’s why I told before: we need a “game theory” in which even evils prefer to chose good option. We must put these mechanisms in practice.
We, the “possess-less” people, must create our alternate “realm” and our alternate “value system”. We do not need to be a part of this system in order to get system resources, because “WE ARE the system”. We can form our system and impact on real world.
Of course in early days no one take us serious, and actually it is a very good chance for us to survive (like Bitcoin in its first 2-3 years), because they do not try to destroy us. Meanwhile we grow and educate our population and fed and bold our “core values”.
The system in which no one can cheat and everyone prefer to act like a good actor – something like Bitcoin hash puzzle solving which everyone prefer to follow rules and find new blocks, instead of wasting energy for cheating old blocks-.

Bitcoin could make these changes in world but it failed because it based on a flawed game theory. The point of power of Bitcoin was/is Proof of Work, and simultaneously the weakest part of Bitcoin – in sense of fairness - is PoW as well, since it couldn't achieve the motto “One CPU, one vote”. Because of its design it ended up in “Who has money, can make more money”. Who has money to buy mining machine and pay for electricity can mine new coins. Who has money can buy many Bitcoins, can manipulate market, create fake waves and endless pump/dump cycles and still riches getting richer and poor getting poorer.

The idea of “decentralization” is a crucial feature of any system wishes to work “fairly”. Bitcoin has a level of decentralization which is not enough to work fairly and just. So we need an alternate “crypto-value” and its proper system (game theory, monetary system, technical architecture, etc). Why I didn’t say we need alternate political regime or alternate ideology or system of thought? Because they are not what we -ordinary people- are facing every day in our day to day life. Instead Bitcoin could be what we face every day. It is about “money” and “personal wealth” -which gives us power to fulfill our needs, whether physical or mental-.
The “money” is our credit in the current society, whereas the real credit must be something else. The solution is to make, the money works in another context. That is, the way of earning money and its indication must be re-defined.
People (including you and me) always seeking for money, because we like the independence and power of having it. This strive for money had no beginning and will have no end and we will continue it forever.
So, what about defining a new kind of money (or better named “credit”), that you need to do some “good act” in order to have eligibility to earn that money?
Some can discuss and argue about “who” and “how” recognize “good act” vs “bad act” and this is another story which has proper answer as well. In short, I can address it, by referring to “justness” and “fairness” in a “real” decentralized system. But for now just imagine we have a perfect (or almost perfect) system that can evaluate your work (what ever work you do daily) and returns a number as usefulness index. The usefulness index represents the fact that how much useful was your job for society, or even better how much useful was your job for whole glob – since we have just one earth and we have to consider the fact that “someones benefit can be someone else lost”-. The system results your 8 hour day job in this new “value system” worth X amount of money, so you earn X coins today. In this system you prefer to follow rule as possible as in order to get higher rate. We have assumed system works enough good and evaluates your job fairly. You can not cheat system in order to earn more money, so you will decide to follow rules and act like a good actor. Not only you but all other investigate the trade-off and decide to act like a good actor.
It is what we were looking for, isn’t? In this system, we will have the rich guys who helped the world more than others. s/he is proud of her/his achievement, s/he is rich and explicitly helped to improve the life of others. It is a win, win, win game. The world is winner. The money supporter community is winner, and the individual person who earned the coins is winner.
One critical question is “Can we have this -almost perfect- evaluating system?”. Since I am a practical philosopher and a technical thinker, my answer is yes. Definitely we have all the technology and tools we need for establishing this realm.

I discover it not so clear in case you're abhorring the btc clients or as it were the fake wealthy individuals since you said that btc will gotten to be futile once the time will come that there will be no web and electricity but didn’t you knew that not all that who utilize btc are bragging that they wealthy . There are destitute clients that are humble and will be humble no matter how much they pick up from the btc they have and there are moreover wealthy individuals that are contributing in btc and on the off chance that these individuals brag will you still discover that hostile.

What can you say? The fact is that the situation in the world has developed in such a way that values ​​have really changed and many who would like to make a profit are now forced to change their vision and do things that previously seemed absurd. But what's next for us? As for finance, I believe that sooner or later the dollar will lose value and because of this, many may suffer. Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have given us the opportunity to improve our financial position and BTC may well be a new asset in the market on a par with gold. Here I want to note that BTC in this case represents both blockchain technology and digital assets themselves, which is value. In any case, changes await us and I hope that for the better.

I think you misunderstood what I've said.

People who are not rich like the people you mentioned is not trying to be cool or call themselves rich in an instant, but just took a step closer to make their own fortune like what everyone of us wants. Now, those crazy rich people that are buying stock and real estate properties is just normal, I mean it is their way to be rich, some or them don't like Bitcoin and cryptocurrency that's why they stick to their own plan.

Furthermore, Bitcoin has more potential to give anyone profits in the long run, remember, buying Bitcoin is not just to look cool, but to be something more better than a guy who's not doing anything with his life.

You really think you can't use gold for that? you can definitely try, and then you can come back here to post video as a proof of what happened (if you survive after you show you got real gold )

What a load of BS? So you are saying that if you can't use an asset for purchasing groceries, or to pay student loan, you will not consider it as a real asset? Let me ask you when was the last time you used gold for these purposes. According to your definition, all those who are holding considerable amounts of gold are not "real rich" and their wealth is all fake. I can't agree with that definition.

I do know about the difference between ICEs vs EVs cars, but still from consumer side as an end-user, people will compare features, prices and ultimately ROI for their purchase, and Tesla by no mean had superior ROI from consumer perspective.

As for "Green", and Bitcoin, I think that's the issue with both of them. They both started for the good purpose (I hope, as I cannot be speaking for real motivation of those who did ), but both ended up being abused. So now both the "Green" is not that "Green" anymore, and Bitcoin is not what is was supposed to be.

Defending derivatives (since we are in that space ), they actually same with hammer - can be used for good, or for bad. Derivatives are commonly lead to greater market efficiency, to greater asset sensitivity to all changes, allow for different types of trades which were not possible before, and ultimately can be leading the underlying asset price formation (as opposed to inefficient markets where asset leads the price of derivatives). But it's another topic, so I think we shouldn't continue on that here

May I know please when was the last time you went to buy groceries or new phone with Bitcoin? Or maybe to repay mortgage or student debt with Bitcoin? Or to purchase or do some M&A deals using Bitcoin? Or even see US GAAP or IFRS to issue standards to keep accounting in BTC? Until this and many many other things happen, BTC is hard to be called a measure of "real rich" unless those with fiat or real assets and means of "old" capital.

That's a great point! From such perspective both the top50-500 in Forbes can be considered as "fake rich", but what differentiates them from other common people is that they know how to manage leverage for own benefit, while the average person falls into the debt trap and rarely succeeds to get out of it by getting addicted to the "cheap money needle". But actually, there's a theory (not sure how true that is) that the really powerful ones and elites who control most of the assets and money are not even in Forbes, or at least not the tops ones there.




Well yes it can exist (or not - depending on severity of the assumed scenario), but in such case why would people need Bitcoin in that world?

As for Winklevoss twins, well it depends on their asset composition. If they hold most of assets in crypto, I wouldn't consider them that rich. One day things might turn out to be in such case that state would completely ban non-state-backed cryptos (yes, another post-apocalyptic scenario, but we saw that in China for example already), and what will happen to their wealth? What if states around the globe coordinate to fight against uncontrolled money supply and take expropriate all BTC from people? - This is not that impossible as it happened with gold before. At that time all fiat-based elites ones will remain where they were, all asset-ones also, all crypto-based elites will vanish...

As for old wealth flocking in BTC, - well yes and no. Yes - it is happening, no - we don't know the reasons for that, and the history showed that they do take opportunities to speculate on hypes (and even Goldman Sachs did before), thus we can't really call it that "old money is flooding to crypto", at least not yet.





I cannot disagree with you guys. In the modern world, you either "eat, or be eaten". And us, learning from computers, phones, books are de facto controlled by the ones who produce those and feed their ideas into those computers, books and phones. And your social circle of mostly less intelligent people (since most of us (but not all) will think we are the smartest in our own group), will be fed by others other ideas which will circulate in this social circle thus reinforcing those ideas which were injected by others. This creates a closed loop which is hard to escape from.

As for Bitcoin - yes, it wasn't created as a mean to be "fake rich". But to make simple analogy what I mean is: Bitcoin is a hammer, you can use it to build your own house (real wealth), or you can keep it and collect other hammers. But the real wealth is in the hands of the ones who control that hammer and the means to produce it (iron and wood if you wish) and can take it away from you any moment, or ban you from using it. Those controlling means of production (hammer and wood) controlled it for thousands of years and didn't change. It's just now they allow you to use it, and smart ones will use hammer to build houses, sell them and transit to owners of hammer and wood. The ones who keep collecting hammers will be out of the game when the music stops playing.

This is what I meant as "fake rich"




You depict the current system pretty well, but I personally really don't see it changing. Even Bitcoin was created for good of people, but it ended up where we are now. And as the time goes - it will get only worse. I wish and really hope you to be correct that we do have all the tools and what is needed to change the system and achieve human prosperity, but I don't think it is the case now...

It could be a simple solution for example - arrange a day X around the globe and raise and awaken to fight the old slave-owners, but this is what is likely to happen. Imagine we crate a simple sign-up and watch time website. People will sign-up for sure. There will be people thinking it's fake and will forget about this. There will be people thinking that "oh, my pizza delivery on that day is more important", "oh, I didn't finish my work assignment, so f*ck the Day X", "I have a date with a pretty girl, - definitely more important than some freaks doing some day x". In the end, for sure there will be some people who will try to raise and fight, but they all will get arrested, and some of them will try to cooperate with the police to get some materialistic benefits by turning in their friends whom they know actually went to "fight". And all this will end pretty quickly... It's an poisoned cycle - to change a system, you need resources, to get resources, you need to become part of system, and by the time you become part of it, you enjoy those resources so much that you don't wanna change anything, because you know well that if you do anything - your resources and nice lifestyle and safety will be taken away from you...



P.S. really love to see all you guys sharing such deep ideas and thoughts on this topic. Really didn't expect that it will attract such smart people!

I would have loved to continue the discussion on Tesla if you weren't comparing apples with oranges. You gave a list of ICE cars comparing them with Tesla. "Green" is not a trend but a necessity for a sustainable future and for the future generations to not face climate disasters. We are just doing our part.

The time when Bitcoin was revolutionary on an individual basis has long gone. Now is the time for slow and steady adoption and establishment of products on top of Bitcoin. Unfortunately, most of the work and focus is on financial derivative products on top of Bitcoin. Bitcoin itself has become a trader's darling for those who wish to day-trade crypto. This doesn't really feel anything like the revolution it was supposed to be. Yet, hope is alive that it will still make a difference.

If BTC is for "Fake rich" then it could not prosper till now. So how can BTC reach this position? There is indeed some speculation but it's not all over. In this platform, some people are not honest and some are always trying to make a profit illegally but the maximum of the users are real from usage. All over the fact is people should have to know it well how to use it.

There is no place for feats and beauty in the modern world.
Right now, it looks like true, but there are solutions too.
What we need is a new paradigm, in which people are respectable, because of their believes and their “acts” of making life easier for others, we need a “practical altruism”. Something beyond just pure morality. A game theory in which everyone has to do the right act in order to make benefit themselves. A system in which even evil can not do bad things. Of course bad doers always can do the bad but the cost of bad must be far higher than doing good. Right now “we have” the necessities for this system and game theory and “we have to” do that as well.
Only in this system can we can hope survive the humankind, whereas in modern history and modern governments (less than 200 years comparing all our thousands years of history) we ruined most of our natural resources and environment and humanity.
The problem is, if right now, one of the evils (supposing a few evils are governing the world) dreamed to stop bad doing and start to good doing, immediately the other bad doers swallow him. As a result, the world is a place of constant conflict and fight between the forces of evil and worst evils.
We -slaves- have no place in this fight. In fact we are the material and victims of this war. We are supporter of this wrong pillar of economy and culture, when we buy their products. we reproducing this social order when we “show off” our possessions, and finally we remain slave and force our child be slave as well if we do not “acting”. The act by which we will create our new political organization.
I am not a dreamer, and I am pretty sure we have all the tools we need, in order to achieve human prosperity.

Yes, in the modern world there is little room for feats and beautiful deeds. 

Man creates new smartphones and computers.  However, don't computers and smartphones change the mind and psyche of people? 

People can learn by imitating more successful people by adopting certain behaviors from them.  However, modern people do not admire other people, but new iPhones.  And they don't learn from humans, but from computers.  As a result, humans themselves become androids.  Information and information flows are the most important thing in the modern world. 

There is no place for feats and beauty in the modern world.

However, the poor (not literally poor) ones want to show off, want to get hot girls, want to get attention from rich guys, want to show they also belong to the elite class. So what they can do? – They pretend to be rich / from higher social class.

As the others mentioned before, they are not Bitcoin's problem. Indeed Bitcoin emerged for realizing “Financial sovereignty”. Although nowadays it looks like it failed on its mission, but this is another story for another day.

I want address the “fake” rich problem by a philosophical point of view.
In ancient Greece civilization there were two kind of people, freemen and slaves. Whereas slaves have to be involved in the painful labor and life to satisfy their masters needs and their bodily needs, the free men have time to do the “heroic action”. The action by which excellence produces beautiful deeds. One could distinguish oneself from others, because of what “action” he did and not because of what he has in possession.
The “heroic action” is what we are missed in our civilization -since we are modern slaves-. So we pretend to be freeman by possession and not by doing “action”.
We have to act, particularly “heroic action”.