Bitcoin Forum

I know this post might sound ridiculous, but I just want you to think about this…

With the current socio-economic development (worsening) of situation, rich are getting richer, poor are getting poorer. Young generations are either trapped in “forever middle class”, or slip to the poverty, or understandingly (or not) work 9-5 (in some places 9-9-6) like in modern slavery…

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.

This is one of the emotions / social factors well played by iPhone in the early days. While it was not the best option from functions, from what it could do, it was priced higher than the same Android-based models. Apple refused to compete in the same old “mobile phone” space, and made out of it a life-style or new generation, where you can be upper class, while not being from there actually (google the stories people selling kidneys or taking loans to buy the new iPhone). And they succeeded! Now if you don’t have the newest iPhone – you are not cool, and “even more poor than me“, while the real elites would be buying Vertu and those phones, “fake rich” happy showing they are rich, while not being one of them. And happy to overpay for it  ;)

 Then comes Tesla. While being highly disadvantageous in terms of performance, design, external/internal interior design, and anything you can imagine as compared to the available at that time cars, they overpriced the very first model, added the ESG b*shit hype, and allowed you to feel part of the “elite new community” who care about environment, who own a car like iPhone (highly manageable from phone, etc.), and they refused to compete in the same pricing category as BMW, Ford, Nisan, etc. And they overpriced it. The story afterwards you know well too ;)

With all the “fake rich” class people needed a new way of showing they are rich, while not being rich / failing to be rich. And Bitcoin, while not being created for that purpose (or being – idk), became a perfect target. Just think about it – you can own a line of code, and nothing more, but be a billionaire sitting on a large pool of digital currency.

YOU LITERALLY OWN A PIECE OF CODE, BUT YOU ARE BILLIONARE PERIOD

What is gonna happen once the post-apocalyptic scenarios come true? When/if there will be no electricity, computers, phones, etc.? People will value no US Dollar backed by state promise to pay off debt… your decentralized piece of code will not exist anymore (I do know about some offline-friendly cryptocurrencies)… only gold or natural resources will become valuable again.

While I do know many “Bitcoin evangelists” will probably hate me for the words above, but don’t you think that Bitcoin intentionally or unintentionally became the new asset for the “fake rich”?

If you own bitcoin you don't even own a line of code. You own a number, that's it.

The Internet and mining won't go down across the world either. There are renewable solutions in Asia and Europe that'd probably be capable of taking over. 50% of power in Europe has to come from renewables, its not as far to get it up to 100% as you might think especially if technology and efficiency improves. And if the Internet goes down for good, we'll probably end up with communism while we work out what to do about it.

To own bitcoin requires some sort of intelligence too (unless you own a crappy etf or a stock) which I think is being missed here. Intelligent people can own bitcoin, you won't see an intelligent person who likes Elon musk or apple.

Then not only Bitcoin, but all will be gone. All fiat money are fictional too, like the Bitcoin private keys without electricity.

Start collecting tangible goods - gold, silver, etc.
Learn surviving skills - archery, etc.

Ironic, the fake rich, looking at the number, the number won’t lie, people can write a wall of text of lies, yet they don’t want to trust the number won’t lie, because they’re so biased, they rather believe in story than a globally recognised parameter of rich: the number won’t lies, the current number of bitcoin is standing at 19k it’s not gonna lie the current gold value is standing at 1930, it’s not gonna lie, the current blue chip value is standing at 30,000 it’s not gonna lie, yup be mature and accept the numbers.

Post-apocalyptic scenario the only thing that matters most are shelter and food. These paper money, gold, minerals or crypto not gonna matter. It's called post-apocalyptic for reason.
However, isn't that a good thing tho if people thought of crypto more specifically bitcoin as prestigious stuff to show off? atleast the value could go up unlike the iphone for pseudo-rich people which gradually losing its value.

Bitcoin isn't just a mere fleeting craze or fad. Bitcoin isn't just a new iPhone model. It is an alternate currency or a new asset class, whichever you prefer. And whether it is cool to have Bitcoin or not, it is an undeniable fact that Bitcoin is truly decentralized, transparent, global, and so forth.

If you are one of those guys who bought Bitcoin because it is cool, then it's not Bitcoin's problem. But you should at least have an idea why it is cool. And depending on how much Bitcoin you bought, you may be truly rich or fake rich, but Bitcoin's price is more or less the same for you and me. And right now, 1 BTC is not cheap at $19,502.63.

Bitcoin is good just for money grab
Year 2017 shows dont be late dont be the bag holder!!

Like all the Investment Bitcoin is no Different main thing just dont be the that last guy the bag holder.

I don't know why you say that, if the reason is that you think they haven't real value like fiat, in my opinion, it's because they prefer to save for a higher price, they will actually get rich once they sell it at the price they have targeted.

yes many think like this

When you only have 1 bitcoin, you are a rich person than the other person who does not know about bitcoin. If the bitcoin price increases, that means your money will become big, but only if you sell your bitcoin. If you do not sell your bitcoin, bitcoin's money value will always change, and you don't own that money. But that will be different if you can use your bitcoin to buy something or pay for something.

We do not have to know the code inside bitcoin because we could only have that bitcoin and use it for our benefit. But yes, if there is no electricity, no internet, and you can not use your bitcoin, that 1 bitcoin will remain 1 bitcoin.

If an Apocalypse happen,the only 2 valuable assets will be FOOD and WATER.
Bitcoin is a line of code(or a number),but gold is just a shiny useless metal.Will you eat gold,when you have no food?Will you buy food with gold,when nobody accepts gold?
In a post-apocalypse world,metals like iron will be more valuable than gold,because you could create useful tools with iron.
I get your point about the "fake rich class",but Bitcoin has nothing to do with iPhone or Tesla.
Bitcoin is supposed to be a currency,a medium of exchange,not a consumer product.
Rich people will always be seen as cool badass players that have high social status,it doesn't matter if they own Bitcoins,Tesla stocks,the new iPhone or something else.

i find it not so clear if you are hating the btc users or only the fake rich people because you said that btc will become useless once the time will come that there will be no internet and electeicity but didnt you knew that not all that who use btc are bragging that they rich . there are poor users that are humble and will be humble no matter how nuch they gain from the btc they have and there are also rich people that are investing in btc and if these people brag will you still find that offensive ? no because they are the ones that are trully rich .

A piece of code that's is used to represent value, same as paper. You can even use plastic, amber, stones etc as money. What matter is the value it represents and whether the material can't be counterfeited, is fraud-proof, will last long and can really work well as money

I think Bitcoin could be built in such a way that the full ledger can be printed and used completely offline. You'd will need to replicate the online Decentralization Model (or a better model) and features/principles on a physical level and have People with full Physical Ledgers (more like full nodes) verify transactions of participants in their communities.

Well you own nothing except numbers on the screen, and your ownership is defined by some points in a plane that is unique and immutable, as defined by the specifications set by Satoshi and other developers themselves. I will not call this "fake rich," as those sitting in piles of numbers on their bank accounts from derivatives also lie within the same principle. Instead, I'll consider them as rich people, like the normal ones who own lots of money from successful businesses since they own something that is highly-valued by other people.

Our perception of value is something complex, and we just magically agree that something is valuable, or has value, like fiat money. If that is the case, then bitcoin is, and will be, valuable too, and if someone owns a lot of it, they are 'rich' because our perception of value says so.

I don't think that you can compare bitcoin to iPhone and Tesla. Those two are status symbols (same as expensive watches) simply because when person is wearing it, he sends the "signal" to others that he is successful/rich/whatever. I never saw someone carrying Ledger around their neck to show off. People I know that own bitcoin usually keep it to themselves and don't brag around how much they own, apart of lambo guys that have "BTC" license plate, but that's another story.

General public is still skeptical of bitcoin, unfortunately. Real life is not bitcointalk. If anything, there is more chance that they will ridicule you for owning some than think that you are successful.

I don't think a bitcoin millionaire is anything different from a normal millionaire. What if you won your millions in the lottery? Or by trading stocks? Orby selling a company? I would make a difference between all of these. In the end money is money. There so many people willing to sell goods like a car or other things for bitcoins.

Gold will still hold some sort of value in an post apocalyptic scenario, we as humans have always been fascinated by the glitter of gold and I do not think that an apocalypse will remove our love for this kind of things. Minerals will be a debatable case as some might not be of use in the current state of things. If crypto becomes something that you use to show off to your friends for clout, I think it does not change the fact that they are still social climbers, they just changed the medium that represents them but the state that they are in will never change.

Bitcoin is for everyone! And owning more bitcoins makes you a rich person! You can exchange bitcoins for other currencies or goods, or you can spend them for fun... there's nothing fake in that, it's real as it can be!
But I understand what OP wish to say, and some people made a good comments about that! I met with people who don't think Bitcoin is real, they can't see it and they can't touch it (their big argument) and they think that the entire crypto world is "fake". In the same time these people don't understand the economic and monetary system of our own country, they don't know where cash is coming from, and what banks are doing... They will wake up, but until that point crypto will break new old and many new records, maybe they will regret their decisions...who knows!

Good point I missed! And loved your point about ETFs and BTC-backed stocks of some companies ;D


In the post-apocalyptic scenario even renewables are unlikely to save you. The only "widely-accepted and agreed on assets / forms of payment" will be left only real assets eventually, like gold, silver, etc. - something what is in possession by the "old elites" and the "truly rich", while the rest are left to play around with iPhones, Teslas and Bitcoins?..


Yes, totally agree. And who controls / owns those now? - I think the answer can be as I mentioned about "the truly rich - old elites"?


Well here we talk about globally accepted and consensus-based reference for intrinsic value of asset - market price. While it surely gives indication of your current net worth, it doesn't mean you are rich though. If today you hold 1,000 of Bitcoin and tomorrow every single country bans it and makes it illegal to hold Bitcoin, then you cannot even use it as collateral for getting loans. With gold (for example) such scenario is unlikely as making it illegal would mean collapse of all central banks (not the case with BTC), would mean end of production of important electronic components (not the case with BTC), collapse of supply chains and monetary systems (if Bitcoin dissapears tomorrow only small % of people will actually care, as most of the population still doesn't even know what that is). That's why doesn't that show you the similarity with Tesla / iPhone - small group of people worked together to hype it to make it as indication of own status and wealth, while in reality the truly wealthy ones stay with traditional side.

I think it is very bad to say that Bitcoin is "Fake Rich". Even though maybe you yourself also store Bitcoin and like it. Could it be that these are just words to scare, in order to buy as much Bitcoin as possible. But what I know is that Bitcoin is amazing, it has proven to be able to last for a long time even since 10 years ago. So of course it can be said that Bitcoin as a real asset of wealth is not just a fake.

Well here I have to agree - shelter, food, and as another commenter said - water (basic needs) will matter only. But from there eventually people will have to restart economy for which they will need medium of exchange, which is unlikely to be BTC since there might be no electricity.


Here I agree about everything, but "isn't a new iPhone" - not so sure. It depends on how you perceive that. Can I buy with iPhone something? - yes. Can I "invest" in iPhone? - yes, - buy wholesale at pre-orders, and sell retail during public release (if you would be in China you would see that's a common model to earn money ;D). Yes, absolutely BTC & iPhone are incomparable in terms of life-span - you unlikely will see price appreciation of iPhone 10000% times like with BTC over 5-10 years (but the opposite), but for short period of time - can. Different lengths of cycles. Like some animals live only few days - for them it's a long live; for humans 100 years is a long live, but for some plants - 1,000 years is a long live. Just the difference on micro/macro levels. But eventually, while most of Forum participants are relatively young (unlikely to be 60-90s yo), and do wish to "be rich", but not all are ready to work hard for that. So they get to pay $19,000 (if they have) to own a number on the screen with the hope that in the future that number will be perceived even more expensive.


They are just "rich" now, for a moment in time when price hit $19k, but after a moment - there's a flash crush, and they are on the street? How about if you own 100 tones of gold? 100 apartments in NY? 100 production factories? - as opposed to owning "a number showing you have 100 numbers of X"

Yeah, one of points also. What you refer to is "greater fool theory" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory)


Not at all - doesn't mean I think Bitcoin doesn't have a value. Otherwise I wouldn't be here, and our project wouldn't be starting with BTC as underlying first :) Just out of curiosity and analogy, had this possible thinking based on socio-economic trends, how iPhone, then Tesla, then now in China real estate developers - all playing on the same trend "fake rich", and with the above comments about "owning a number" - I guess it adds points to the theory about BTC also?


Come to China or Hong Kong and you will see ;D 99.9% don't know what is Bitcoin or how to buy it, and you might have even 10 Bitcoins, but most of the people you meet will be more rich than you because they got apartments, which continually increase in price without drops (yes, it can be another topic for discussion about possible real estate bubble there).


Food, water, shelter, sleep, etc. - something what can satisfy basic needs - you are correct. I guess the rest of your comments are also correct ;D but about Bitcoin - yes, it's good medium of exchange, very convenient for international transactions, etc. But when most of the people get $1,000,000 first time, what they do? - for for real estate, some FX, some equity, and might consider minor risky assets (you can check even those "currently rich" crypto millionaires / billionaires). So how do you think why? - do they want to finally get attached to the "true elites" with real wealth? If BTC on that level would be really as good as other assets (i'm not against any nor support any - everything is good for own purposes), why wouldn't they just buy all BTC they can? Then earn, then buy more, and more? And currently / historically / likely in the future the future of country / nation is decided not by the top-crypto holders, but by the ones with significant political influence, or by UHNWI & corporates. - this can be summarised, as they say in Russia "there are 2 types of politicians: 1) politicians who own banks, and 2) politicians who are owned by banks" - effectively it's bankers and their closed circle, not crypto-billionaires who get to decide what will be our future.

As noted above, neither I, neither our team, neither our company hates BTC or any crypto-asset (except for scammers). It's just an example of analogy that can be made based on how things in the world develop.


Yes, and you will end up owning the paper money or plastic or stone with BTC printed. But it won't be that type of asset owned by the "elites", will it?

I think you made the best point, which can just cover all other comments and requires no debates. It's just about perception of value, which can be attached to anything any time / or can forcibly change, and people's wealth perception and number-based calculated could immediately change. Some assets have shown to have long-lasting attached perception of wealth (land, gold, factors of production, etc.), while others - we just need to wait and see if it's same (Bitcoin), or it's not, or it will be completely another thing.



Another great point! But I was refering to those with Lambo with BTC place, or the ones that actively show off how much they good (on Twitter, Youtube, etc.) - that's the major point of analogy with iPhone/Tesla/etc. owners (I have nothing against either of those though).




Oh yes, there's gonna be huge difference between all of those (trader, businessman, lottery winner, etc.). The lottery winner is probably gonna be the most "fake rich" among others ;D But as you correctly said, there's different type of "rich". Rich with 1,000 Bitcoins in many places will be nobody (go to the North of Russia and see yourself), while rich with actual $19,000,000 in the same place is gonna be a different story and probably the mayor would come to meet him in person ;D




Absolutely agree with your points. Gold will be also the most easy "thing" to use as a medium exchange, since there will be no printers to print new USD, nor any computer to mine BTC/verify transactions/send money to someone (apart from yourself).

I didn't made any claim, but rather shared potential historical analogy, and happy to hear everyone's opinion here.

How can you say this words if you think that bitcoin is just a fiction then you should educate your self try to do more research for more about bitcoin and never ever compare anything into liquid materials comparing bitcoin into Iphones? Bitcoin is per to per and it can be use anywhere and now can be use as payment method to those restaurant who uses it. How about those billionaires who already invested in bitcoin? They put their trust into bitcoin to make more profit then they should be faking it too? is that what you meant? People nowadays are luck on educational it is better to do your own research mate just sayin.

To make it clear, even if you do own a lots bitcoin and you still don't know anything about this project in my on idea you own nothing. Because by owning a piece of named private key and saving it under carpet you won't be rich you should do your own research and know what is the bitcoin. Imagine someone who don't know difference between gold and metal owning 90k of gold what is the point if he doesn't know what is it and how to use it? Knowledge is wealth and power.

If we look at things in general, then it really is that way, and it has always been that way - because in order for the rich to be rich, the others must be poor. All my life I have heard that 10% of people in the world control 90% of everything that exists, and 90% of people fight for the remaining 10%. Since the poor constitute the majority, it is their fault that they do not change the system and allow everyone to live a dignified life.


Pretending is ultimately just pretending after all, you can’t be part of the elite just if you own the latest smartphone or if you sell a kidney or some other body part to buy a car driven by the elite. Being part of the elite means having an almost inexhaustible source of money which ultimately distinguishes them from what we call ordinary people.

The real question is actually who are these people who want to portray themselves as fake rich people? I personally would never want to (even if I could) stand shoulder to shoulder with most of these people who make up today’s elite.


I hope you are not one of those who are waiting for the end of the world at any moment, because if some kind of global apocalypse happens there will not be much difference between whether you have great wealth, or you are as poor as a church mouse - of course if you don't believe the rich have a solution to their salvation - something like what was shown in the 2012 movie. It is never wise to keep all the eggs in the same basket, I think that is also true when it comes to BTC.


The “fake rich” paradigm in the context of Bitcoin is completely wrong in my opinion, because anyone can be rich if they own something valuable. A man who owns gold is rich until that gold loses its value or someone steals it - he who owns shares in a company is also rich if the company is successful - but he can lose everything overnight because of a scandal in which that company finds itself.

Bitcoin, as far as we know, came in response to this perverted and rotten financial system that currently exists, and has given people the opportunity to try to be as independent as possible from that system. Bitcoin is for some much more than money, freedom has never had a price.

If you have a few bitcoins, or a large amount of bitcoins, of course you will not get fake wealth anymore, but you are really rich. The bitcoin price currently hitting $ 19,000 is a fantastic price. all that happens is that you have an invisible asset. real not fake

But those lambo boys got their cars because they made profit from the buying BTC cheap, not because they bought BTC when it was 15,000 USD so they bought Lambo with BTC tags in order to brag. When I see people around me that are buying bitcoin, I see none of those that are buying it for a status symbol. They even hide how much they have.

People often buy iPhone with the money they don't have have in order to impress, but I don't know how would you brag with few thousands of dollars worth bitcoin, and who would even be impressed with that.

So no, I don't think that bitcoin is for the "fake rich".

We invested in BTC back in 2016, while knew about it from even earlier. Thus believe me education about what is Bitcoin, it's tech side, economic side, investment side, and all others - is there :) For the point about BTC can be used as a payment method - well I already wrote about that above. As for billionaires who recently invested: 1) have you actually checked their wallet personally to know it's true? 2) you registered in BitcoinTalk since 2016, thus I assume you do know from the history what usually happens soon afterwards such claims by such people / banks / funds / etc. are publicly made. And again, neither I, neither anyone us here is against Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies at all. Just check what is happening in the world, economy, society, how marketing works, and you eventually will notice the (possible) trends.




That's very deep and good point though.




Well of course they got the car cuz they sold their BTC. But eventually if BTC is really so-so-so good (from their perspective), why they didn't keep it till it reaches $1M/1BTC? Or they just played the "greater fool theory" pretty well at a time when it permitted?

For sure people won't buy BTC to show off that they have 1-2 BTC, but they will buy it because it will give them access to the status of "rich" as they believe (which could be just "fake rich"?). Just like in the daily life there's a phone (some old Nokia for poor (no offence for anyone) vs. latest Verty for super rich vs. latest iPhone for "fake rich"), there's a car (some old Ford model for poor vs. latest Bugatti / Rolls Royce for super rich vs. Tesla for "fake rich"), and there are assets (lottery tickets for poor vs. direct PE/VC/infrastructure investments for super rich vs. ... :)) Still it's just thinking out loud - no claims here or assured statements, as some of the people here noted - value of wealth, and how you measure it - relative thing which will change with time and with each own individual preferences.

The dollars in your bank account are (for the most part) invisible as well, so I don't see much a difference here.  There are not nearly as many physical dollars in existence as there is electronic dollars in the system, so either way you're relying on faith that what you consider to be a valuable asset that others will as well and accept it as a barter exchange, whether it's bitcoin or dollars.  With bitcoin though, it's not completely invisible as you can transfer the value in the ledger to others who can accept that as payment.

Yes, I also think so as you noted above.


With this point I would disagree. You can be part of the elite with just the latest smartphone or rented things. Check here the latest story: https://www.whatsonweibo.com/the-fake-rich-of-shanghai-peeking-inside-a-wannabe-socialite-wechat-group/

It's about girls in Shanghai who pretended to be rich, to get rich husbands (thus joining the elites eventually). There are similar things in Russia (not so organised though ;D), and I guess in many other places. That's why people say "fake it till u make it".

People who want to portray themselves as being rich, while not actually being ones - mostly hungry for money, greedy, or just simple people who don't see other ways of improving their lives. Just with regular social / life pressure - people are stimulated to show success and rewarded for doing so (YouTubers, Instagramers, TikTokers, etc.), and eventually some of them do turn out to become actually rich and go to buy houses, cars, some shops, restaurants, etc.


Don't worry I am definitely not waiting for the apocalypse. And while the elites might have some "Plans Z" for such case, with the end of the world, as you said correctly - it's unlikely there's anything what can save anyone.


Very agree with the first part, but haven't some assets had proven historically that they are here for a very long time? With Bitcoin - we just need to wait and see how it goes in the next 100-1000 years just like we saw with gold. Bitcoin indeed can heal the current rotten financial system, or it can get crashed when someone thinks "that's enough" and then again the old elites just continue with their own old pace and things get back to where they were (or probably get worse).

Are you for real, what do have say about institutional investors who have invest heavily on bitcoin? They believe in bitcoin and its revolutionary concepts, they don't want to depend and hope on centralized system that's why they have their share of wealth and investment into Bitcoin and altcoins.
Take it or leave it, Bitcoin is just as good as messiah who gave many individuals an opportunity to show the world the less previlage their power of decentralization to wealth.
Many of today top reach people started earlier, that's why they have been at the top and don't want to step down. $3k to $19k is super amazing as investment than keep money on fixed deposits with shit profits.

People will always try to show off wealth and try to "fake it 'til you make it" has been around for a long time. I wouldn't say that Bitcoin is especially popular for this purpose, because it is hard to show off a "piece of code" compared to a loan spent to buy a flashy car or the latest piece of fashionable clothes that they can show around town. Either way it is better to ignore such trivial displays of wealth and concentrate on improving your own life.

Go ahead if you think Bitcoin is for fake rich, but for me Bitcoin can make my finances even more. In fact, I can buy some items
from the profit I made from Bitcoin, so Bitcoin gives me real wealth. In fact I am also sure that there are many people who have
the same opinion as me, therefore many people are competing to collect as much Bitcoin as possible. Because they believe the wealth
that Bitcoin will give is real.

It depends from how you interpret this matter, Bitcoin is an opportunities to those who understand it well, while for some it's just a fake wealth maybe becaus of volatility and it's behavior that it can go down within the glimpse of an eye. By following you with your sentement, it helps you in your financial state so it's useful.


Yeah right, better to focus with your life on how to improve it than to care about things that won't help you, conserve your energy and focus to whatever you think that beneficial to you.

Maybe it is just a number, not seen and not touchable, however, the numbers show really what we have and we will also be able to make it true for us when cashing out. I do not mind about considered as a rich man or not, about entering a high class or not. this is just what we have and what we can do with this. As long as this is earning for us, why not.
Some people may use Bitci as their power of wealth. It is also not their fault because that is the fact they own it and be able to cash it out to make them rich. however, if it is still in Bitcoin, this is a code and digiatl. Not all people will know about it,

===
It has been a blessing to a lot of gold bug didn’t listen to those non sense stock market create real value story, and these gold bugs hodl their gold like a religions through the entire market cycle, and their reward is so sweet, they watch their value goes up which is re best rewards ever it doesn’t need a lot of fancy praising and attention given to them on the social network, they enjoy the reward alone and on he dark so they’re extremely aware of social event which sound very fake to them just some wannabe rich who get a lot of wealth suddenly and making a lot of noise to impress some fast women fast car and fast house. We are the gold bugs, watching all the blue chip mega rich, spending money like a drug addict over the past decade and turn their once very famous very perceived rich to a dumpster red chip that the companies eventually goes burst and get boot off the bourse.

Yeah yeah the perceived “real rich” business owner very famous on the social network very political influential very high smv very successful, just over ten year they turn from having everything to have long nothing but a bloke, such a “real rich” to be ironically.

Too bad, the gold bugs are too very smart they had know ahead of time all this so called perceived “real rich” and their little cat and mouse game, they decide to not play this stupid game of the “real rich”, they do not crave for attention, they do not crave the recognition, they do not need to tell everybody they’re rich all over the place, the only thing they care most about is looking their numbers goes up, it’s very frugal, very real, very inspiring, and very encouraging number to them, their life is totally out of the social norms, they don’t need those noise to tell them they’re really the greatest person on be earth.

===

If you buy me a ticket plus all accommodation to China or Hong Kong, I will go there ;D

I guess that is happening in many countries, not just in China or Hong Kong because people do not think about bitcoin or other new things around them. Having bitcoin really means for me, and I don't care if they are rich than me because I have my life, and as long as I can feel enough for my life, that will be good for me.

Well you mentioned several parts, so I will answer part by part :)
1) Institutional investors is not a good benchmark, because you can check what happened with LTCM, Lehman Brothers, and many many other bankrupt funds
2) They don't invest in asset because they believe in it. They think they can profit from it and that's all. Yes, some people might believe, but very few of them will direct institutional money simply because they believe in it
3) They say they believe - doesn't mean they do. It can simply be market manipulation - check the history of BTC before when GS said it's gonna go up, and their subsidiary in EU was selling all clients' BTC, and after that market crashed
4) The above points refer to the "Greater Fool Theory" - buy it if you believe there will be fools who will buy from you later @ higher prices
5) If you believe $3k to $19k is amazing, what you can say about the following?:

- Novavax $NVAX +3030%
- Nio $NIO +1030%
- Arcturus $ARCT +1025%
- Overstock $OSTK +765%
- Fiverr $FVRR +760%
- Moderna $MRNA +728%
- Plug Power $PLUG +700%
- Celsius $CELH +682%
- Seres $MCRB +660%
- Tesla $TSLA +650%
- Bitcoin $BTC +182% over same period

6) If you believe Bitcoin will change your life / global economy, then you should believe also that e-cars will do so, vaccine by Moderna will do so, etc. etc.





You are absolutely correct. I didn't mean that BTC is made for showing off and making someone "fake rich", the point was maybe it became so popular, because it gave hope to those who are "wanna be rich". Of course not 100% only because of this, but I think it could have played on this global trend?





Yet if Bitcoin is for "old elite rich" why do you sell it to cash out? Just keep holding BTC forever, but you eventually exit (maybe partially or completely - doesn't matter) to fix your profit in the "real rich" measure - USD / gold / real estate / stocks / consumables. That is your final goal, rather than collect BTC and sit on it...





Yes, mostly agree with you. It's about how you personally perceive it and use it. But the end point for those who are "wanna be rich" is still having USD account even after profiting from BTC. USD / gold / EUR / estate / etc. is the end destination to be rich for most of those people, isn't it? So if you look at it from another side - BTC is a transmission tool to uplift your (not you personally, but overall ;D) social class. Again, like with those with iPhone, Tesla, case in China/HK, etc. - they use those tools to uplift social class and not seam too poor, so they can eventually get to know more rich people, get more opportunities, and eventually hope to transit to "old elites".





You depicted the current system and historical trend very sadly, yet very correctly. It's also about how you view it. We can blame socio-economic system to be rotten and bad, others can take advantage of it. Same is happening with cryptos and any other area. You are always "in" and use it / benefit from it, or "out" and can blame it for being unfair or bad. Same will be with Bitcoin after 50 years - new generations will likely blame all of us and forum members for being explotive manipulators who took control to the extend we could during the early days of Bitcoin and crypto currencies.

I personally and we as the team will make sure you come to China & Hong Kong for a trip, once as.exchange (http://as.exchange) hits $1M daily trading volume ;D you can screenshot this and save, and BitcoinTalk members will be the witnesses of this promise ;)



So you mean that you treat BTC like some super-rich tread pieces of art, right? They also buy it for the sake of personal belief and pleasure, yet if they profit from it - they are happy, if not - not a big deal in the end.

Honestly "fake rich" has been a thing before crypto as well, it could be part of it nowadays but that doesn't mean there was a problem with fake-rich people after crypto neither, nor there is a problem with crypto.

So, I would have to say just like how tesla wasn't made to look like you are rich, it was build because it was electric and it would be a lot more helpful for the world instead of using basically oil in the end, so all I can say is the fact that people are looking at bitcoin differently and they could promote how "rich" they are with it if they want to, but when they fail to actually spend that kind of money, it will turn out that they are not rich at all and their whole ruse will come to an end, don't know how long they can continue with it but they totally can.

Yes, I totally agree. Different times, different instruments, but the human nature stays the same.


This was exactly my point. It's about how smart you utilize the means to move from "wanna be rich" to "actual rich". But eventually for the "actual rich", nor iPhone, nor Tesla, nor Bitcoin currently are not the final destinations once they reach the "actual rich" (of course there are exceptions). Maybe it will change over time, but not right now I believe.

Bitcoin millionaire can liquidate all of their money and can spend it whereas the stock investor can't really do that because meanwhile doing the prices will actually going to fell down which is also possible in bitcoin but more likely to happen when a billionaire by stock market investor is doing it.

Bitcoin is actual currency and also can be considered as an asset which is more convenient to use so its actually going to be a part of every billionaire's portfolio in the near future.

The social phenomenon of poor people pretending to be rich is way too rare to have any influence on other things, like Bitcoin. What you're asking is if Bitcoin is a status symbol, and it's obviously not - you can own even tiny pieces worth less than $1. You can't show it off, if you'd tried to post a Bitcoin signed message on social media, no one would understand what it means.


Who cares about post-apocalyptic scenarios, if they would actually happen, 99% of us will be instantly dead.

as just another value asset bitcoin has a market and people ready to buy and sell.
I don't think any asset would be needed in a post-apocalyptic scenarios...did you prefer to own a Picasso painting or a farm? covid19 has been already a sort of day 0, something very hard that has changed our life. bitcoin has showed a strong resilience, touching also a new ATH ;)

Hahaha
Done to screenshot and save the link ;D
You can tell us when your exchange hits $1M daily trading volume ;D
That will be challenging to hits that, but I am sure you can do that if you can attract so many traders to trade on your exchange.

I will be happy too if I can profit from bitcoin, especially when the bitcoin price can break $21k. I am waiting for this moment to sell some bitcoin I have, and I am making some profit. I treat bitcoin as an investment and income source, so I will try to make as much profit as possible.

I also believe that some of those people really used Bitcoin or crypto as their asset,
But do we need to care about how they want to spend their money?
They earned it on their own so they have the right to buy what they want unless you are envious about their achievement or what they have.

With the Bitcoin price above 22,000 USD, I wouldn't call that "fake rich" anymore. With those kind of price levels you are actually rich by holding some coins. Nothing wrong with that. I wouldn't care about anyone looking down on me if I made it big with cryptos. Unfortunately it's still a long way to go for me.

Who said that with liquidating BTC position prices won't fall down?




I think the phenomenon is quite global though. While you think it might be happening with TikTok-ers only in the specific country, it takes place in USA, EU, Asia, Russia... Don't have enough knowledge to comment about Latin America or Africa, but I would assume it should be same. And this trend is way too fundamental not to influence other things. And my comment about "fake rich" is not about showing off with your public key, but rather about this particular asset being trendy and very well positioned to be inline with the overall trend so that it could give a hope to those "wanna be rich" that they can avoid savings, FX, bonds, stocks, etc., and there's such an easy and quick way to move in their social status via this particular tool.


True, but that's a good baseline of what is really fundamental and will be left once extreme-case scenario takes place.




Of course would prefer to own a farm rather than Picasso or Bitcoin... and farm itself is an asset, isn't it? I believe ATH isn't the best indicator of something's resilience, as tulps, Lehman, LTCM, and many other things had ATH at some point in time too.




We already got approximately $40-50k daily, which is a good start given that we launched just recently, so we are on the way ;) Don't lose this link! And thank you for your trust - we are also confident that in 2021 fairly quickly we should reach the goal! You can help us too :)


Given the today price development you already did profit a great deal from BTC! So congratulations on that! But you could profit even more if you would be using our Tranched Value Securities with less risk ;)




I think fair point. Yet, the discussion and question were not about that.




Even when price reaches $100,000 / BTC or $1M - it won't change the fundamental things that me and other members have mentioned.

Great. It seems you've done great with your exchange. What you need now is to promote your exchange here, so people know that you can be bigger and have a chance to compete with the other exchanges.

Yes, I am happy to sell my bitcoin at my target price, waiting for the next target price. I also load up more bitcoin by buying back bitcoin at below $23k because I expect another bitcoin price jump. Can you explain more details about Tranched Value Securities?

I think post apocalyptic scenario is too much exaggerated. See, in any case the apocalypse won't happen suddenly or in blink of an eye. The change would be gradual and seriously it is happening right now but we are not seeing it anyway.

So we will have changes into blockchain as well. May be there won't be changing of codes but there will be upgraded system. May be a completely different blockchain based technology. This kind of revolution is always there when we need it or when it's outdated tech that we still using. May be it's time to sit back and enjoy the pie that we have.

The idea of Bitcoin is not really understood by many people up until this point. They just knew that it is either a digital currency or a form of investment so I guess it won't be something to flex towards other people if they won't really know its importance in the first place unlike on physical things such as cars, phones and the likes. Those wherein OP have referred to as 'fake rich' are typically social climbers, to be more appropriate. The fact that single thing you own will not make you to the upper class, doesn't really make any sense.
 I the post-apocalyptic scenario, nothing will matter anymore except from food, and other necessities an individual will need to survive, that's it. Things are applicable not only with Bitcoin but to all currencies, if this scenario will meet the reality. Technologies will be close to being useless except for those which will contribute to one's survival but for sure there will no longer be systems in general, that will be functional because that would be a total chaos which will more likely to happen.

I agree. It is the same with other investments/assets as well. It might not be the same with others in which bitcoin is so volatile but that doesn't matter. The price is out there right now and it might increase much more in the next few years. These people might be anonymous as well, but for me that is just rightful following the pseudo-anonymity of bitcoin.

No, Bitcoin is for real and I have no doubt about it. If you own just 1BTC in your digital wallet, you are absolutely rich if you are going to sell it and the value of your profits will depend on which particular countries you are in. You will be much richer if the value of USD is much higher in your respective country. So, for me, Bitcoins is not for fake rich because you can withdraw it anytime you want if you owned some. However, electricity and internet signal are the most important factors to Bitcoins to become alive and useful. Without this, we cant access our digital wallets, but this doesn't mean that Bitcoins is for Fake Rich with the absence of that. On the other hand, I understand your sentiments about such people who just wanted to show us that they were rich and they have the capability to go with the trend, though in reality they were over drowned with debts. Personally, I've known some people like that and sadly, we don't have the power to correct that kind of behavior. Maybe, its really their way to compete with the elite people and hide their depressions being on the lower class of the society. And with that scenarios you've given, I cant hardly compare Bitcoins with that rich-pretentious  people. I think its way too far with Bitcoins to be involved with that.

There is indeed some truth in this because as everyone understands (even if they deny it on the surface, but inside they know for sure that this is so) that without relying on the same "fiat money", any cryptocurrency is just useless numbers that cost less than nothing.
everyone wants wealth in fiat money - dollars, euros - from cryptocurrencies, but they do not want to use cryptocurrencies as a measure of price in itself. no one wants to go to a restaurant and pay a conditional 0.2eth for dinner - they want to go to a restaurant and pay $ 100 for dinner, but through eth conversion.
People themselves have come up with a gasket between themselves and fiat money and believe that this is the real future and independence - but they do not want to understand that such actions simply kill what the cryptocurrency really is. and at the same time, they do not forget to say and write everywhere that fiat money is evil, that banks are evil, that the state that prints money is also evil.
And it's both very funny and very sad. Tragicomedy as it is.

iPhone, Tesla, BMW, etc ,,, are physical forms that can be seen and displayed to others, while bitcoin is just a code of numbers and letters that we never know who owns it unless they have their private key.
if I may choose it is better to be plain than rich.
This life must be realistic, don't be too pushy if you can't, use what is available according to your ability.

Fake rich ?  :D
indeed everything that is digital feels imaginary and unreal. therefore even though there are one million bitcoins in your wallet, they are just numbers. it is useless if it is not withdrawn and made into fiat money for daily needs. the point is digital is just numbers and it is useless if it is not made into something real or that we can take advantage of. because everything has its characteristics, advantages and disadvantages, so I admit that bitcoin is very dependent on technology. if technology is lost then bitcoin will also be lost. but don't forget the excess bitcoin. let's balance the two  ;D.

Undoubtedly, every person who holds in his hands a material, physical value, he will value it much more than bitcoin, the code of which he does not understand and cannot even touch. But nevertheless, if you take the banking system as an example, then these institutions make money on the fact that they appeal only in numbers, and not in material values. Therefore, we should be calm, having cryptocurrency on our accounts.

Bitcoin allowed many of these people to escape the low or middle class level and enter the 1% elite.

I read once about the way white earbuds worked for Iphone. It was a visible sign of who had an expensive phone with them when a person walked down the street and they sold like fresh buns. Other companies saw that and Samsung begun to also sell white ones, followed by other companies but the damage was done. Apple knew people would buy ther products just for show and stand in lines to get the newest version.

Bitcoin wasn't for rich or fake rich 11 years ago when it costed less than $1.

You can be sure that with our offerings and patent that we are obtaining, even the top10 current crypto-exchanges will seam too small in the future compared to us. Because what they do is developing ecosystem around crypto-assets (exchange, payments, banking, etc.), but we don't and won't - we are specializing in innovative financial instruments and will be expanding in that vertical which will cover not only crypto-assets, but traditional ones as well. Though, it's not for self-promotion here :) And thank you for your valuable advise!


I will be happy to and it will be our team's pleasure! But I am not sure how appropriate it is to explain in this tread as other community members might perceive that as aggressive advertisement or spam in irrelevant thread. I would love to invite you to our telegram channel where you can chat with our CEO (in my signature) or to one of our threads where we talk about TVS (in ANN thread and "everything you wanted to know about BTC TVS") - whatever you feel more comfortable with.

I hope for understanding from other BitcoinTalk members, as this was not intended to be self-promotion or marketing thread

Buying anything below $23k might be a valid short-term strategy, but if you want to make sure you really earn good and sustainable return, you better wait for bigger correction (advise from our CEO :)) - "buy when there's a blood on the streets" as someone said. Or use innovative financial products which will help you to lock in your own desired price/risk level ;)




Well, I assumed apocalypses if happens will happen pretty quickly. Otherwise if it's gradual and slow - it's crisis and we will have time to prepare for that. And if we expect Bitcoin or other cryptos to be run on a completely other technology in the future, that means we don't expect the "true" and "authentic" Bitcoin which we all currently trade and have to exist. Do you mean we should prepare for the current Bitcoin to die gradually and be replaced by more advanced "improved Bitcoin"?




You really provided a great details and analysis of the possible scenario! Really appreciate that. However, "the single thing" can lift your social class... or at least make your social class appear to be higher than it is. Like if you go with lambo to some high end restaurant (even if you just rented it for 1 hr) will get you new and useful connections who can further uplift your class, as opposed to gong to the same restaurant by taxi or bus. And with post-apocalyptic scenario, as you correctly noted, all tech-things will become useless and not needed, but as there will be some people left who survived they will gradually re-establish social-economic system and they will need some medium of payment (as barter economy will soon prove them again to be inefficient), and BTC unfortunately won't be there top choice, but gold or something else, what is currently controlled by the "true elites". What do you think?




But as other members noted (not even me) that you pay that much for the chance to have that blink number to appear on your screen... If something happens (which we discussed in this thread - many things can happen) you will be left with nothing (which can happen intentionally or unintentionally due to someone specific or due to unforeseen events), and that would literally destroy all that wealth of the ones who believed in this idea, while leaving the "traditional elites" with more wealth and less competitors.




Your last two sentences are very close to my point ;D but this is not exactly what I meant. Yes, I do accept Bitcoin is a great thing and invention, but all I mean is that it's mainly used by people who intent to be "fake rich" (obviously not all as we see from this tread), whether purposely or not, it gives those iPhone/Tesla/AppleWatch owners the second chance to own asset, which is just a number on the screen, and doesn't exist without the tech infrastructure (but gold, stocks and real estate will exist even without tech infrastructure), and a hope to uplift their social class due to their inability to participate in the core "elite" assets and investments.





Wow! I have nothing to add to your point. Very deep, very correct and very to the point. Nobody ever will say that Bill Gates is #2-3 in Forbes because he got 1,000,000 Bitcoins, but only because he got X billions of Dollars. So nobody will say Apple is finally 10,500,000 Bitcoins worth company (for example), but only "it's finally a Trillion Dollars company". That's the end of story where the true power is, despite USD being inflated, overprinted, etc. - when the time comes, the "elites" will replace it with something they need (even if it's Bitcoin), but not anything not that - is not for "real rich", but probably for "fake rich" to play around until the time permits.




True, and due to human nature, people will prefer to have something they can touch, smell, taste, see, rather than just believe in a number on the screen.




Yes, but what we gonna do if gov takes severe anti-crypto measures and cuts off all electricity for every single miner in the world (that's traceable and possible if needed)?





Yes, so isn't that a prove that they used Bitcoin to transit from "wanna be rich" to the "actual rich" simply by selling all Bitcoin and cashing out to fiat? If they would stay in Bitcoin or other crypto - they would become nearly bankrupt when BTC dropped to 4.8k (cuz they do have fiat loans), and would have nothing left to reinvest when BTC corrected recently. So as I said I assume - Bitcoin is a great tool for the "wanna be rich" to uplift in the social class to become "actually rich", but if you wanna be "actual rich", you not gonna stay fully in crypto.




It's not for fake rich, but it allowed "fake rich" or "wanna be rich" to become "actual rich" by cashing out.

I'm not sure hwerd you're getting your ideas from, but a lot of people here will agree with me that bitcoin is for the people. Not exclusively for the rich, the poor, or the fake rich as you are trying to put it. Same goes with "status symbols" that you and the society implemented on to us. So what if we want an iphone? Is it not great to have a piece of tech? So what if you can afford these things and have a sedentary lifestyle? You are on your own in this world, hating on everyone won't do you good.

Besides, bitcoin is there to help these people to gain profits, not to show off that they can afford these things, why would you persecute someone who just wants to earn in a way he know? Truly ridiculous. Everything is made up of code really if you think about it. Even you yourself is made up of biological codes so I don't see where the discrimination is coming from. Though if you are content with having a simple lifestyle, we can't really blame you. But don't rub it to other people's faces because we have ambitions to fulfill, and unlike you, it cannot be simply satiated by a simple lifestyle where you cut off wood, build a campfire, play a banjo in the middle of nowhere and you're good to go. Some of us are sick and tired of being poor, which they were able to get out of thanks to things like bitcoin for instance. I'm not saying bitcoin is a get rich scheme. But it is a great help for people who are either:
* starting to learn how to trade/code
* people who knew they weren't cut for the regular 9-5 jobs because of circumstances.

So curb your dreams on your own, don't rub it on us.

I don't know if I can fully agree with your point, but I do agree with the statement that Bitcoin is for "fake rich".
As far as I know most of bitcoin is being held by whales and makes sense - fees are not as valuable for them, you make enormous amount of money and its probably only 1-10% of your portfolio in bitcoin while the other parts are in way lower risk area.
People who invest >50% of their holdings into bitcoin are trying to gamble and get money fast which isn't necessarily will lead to wealth, because at the end of the day its still gambling

You are pretty correct in the few first points, but you are not really correct by saying that "hating on everyone won't do you good". Nobody here hates anyone, and not sure from which sentences you drawn such conclusions :) While you certainly can just simply like some piece of tech/etc., there are very few out there that actually do (what so good iPhone 12 will do for you as compared to iPhone X as a regular user, for example?). Most people either understand what they do by getting the status symbols, or don't even understand.

And your comment about "bitcoin is there to help these people to gain profits" I think might be the most obvious sign of misunderstanding of the basic and core concept of Bitcoin as was stated by other members multiple times, whom I fully agree with. However, your perception of BTC as "to get profits" just proves my point, fortunately or unfortunately.


Yes, then let's talk about everything is made of strings as a part of string theory? :) Bitcoin is made of fundamental strings, us, cars, apartments, Earth, air - we are just a massive soup of strings if you wanna go that way of thinking, but please try to stay clear in your direction of thoughts, and let's not mess things up as if after LSD. Don't compare digitally recorded and created by human codes (new Android app, web-page, Bitcoin, etc.) with the codes of nature / God / luck / whatever you believe in (DNA, physical laws, mathematical principles, etc.).

And for the rest of your comment I am afraid you are again just proving the correctness of my point about Bitcoin for "Fake Rich" / "Wanna be Rich" as you don't see other hope but to play around and purchase for $24,000 "digitally recorded and created by human code". I assume you do purchase altcoins as well with the same motivation as you stated above? In any case, unfortunately, I don't know the reason but you obviously show that it's you unreasonably started hating me for simply asking people to share their opinion and discuss? Thus I believe we might not have a constructive dialogue, at least about this particular subject.

Wow, this is amazing point as well! I missed this direction though and meant another point as discussed earlier, but your point perfectly makes sense too.

In my opinion, impulsive buying your wants is different in being a FOMO when it comes to investments. Being a social climber is different from being a crypto guy who wants his life to be change rather than staying poor (not totally poor). Buying an iPhone won't give you any profits after you buy them, even in the long run, hence it will just gonna be depreciated, while buying Bitcoin is the exact opposite of it.

Bitcoin is not for "Fake Rich" display so you could ride in the same boat with the Elites. Bitcoin is for being a legitimate rich man because of profits you could have in the long run.

Generally I do agree with your opinion, but as you noted also - "Bitcoin is for being a legitimate rich man because of profits you could have in the long run", thus it's an "accessible version" of investment which people hope will make them rich, while Bill Gates, Rothschild family, etc. would be buying out land, gold, corporations, diamond mines, real estate, which would make them even richer, while we as regular people can't do same, but are "wanna be" those cool guys, right? :)

I do not get these type of people, I had a "customer" like this once upon a time, he talked about how he had "5 million ripple" and how he was so rich that he could buy the whole operation instead of just buying the product, he was "that" rich. All I was doing was trying to sell him the product, not the operation so this didn't impressed me, and I said he could have 1 billion dollars or 100 dollars and I would still be asking for just 100 dollars.

This pissed him off even more, and he said I shouldn't treat people who can barely afford 100 dollars or people who could buy 1 thousand of them and not even be worried about it. So this type of people, who are either fake rich or even some real rich people, wants us to treat them as very rich people and try to be like moon to them never leaving their sight and always begging their attention and always kissing their ass. That is the purpose apparently.

Haha, thank you for your great story and for sharing with us :D You are absolutely correct! Apparently as some people before were wrongly assuming that nobody would show off with X amount of crypto... some people actually do, as expected ;D

Well. Many people in this world couldn't stay humble and always flex their profits to everybody out of nowhere. So I guess we shouldn't be praising this kind of people and always begging their attention because they have nothing good to do with us. Crypto is not made for people like this; investing in cryptocurrency can help us become independent and reach our goals in life, not to beome a materialistic person.

The concept of fake rich or more correctly the "nuoveau riche" isn't really new.

Yet, extending that to Bitcoin is false. The premise you build upon is also not correct IMO. Tesla cars of the beginning introduced some very advanced concepts. Some of the technology that went into optimizing the battery management, materials for batteries and stacking were patented ideas put into an actual product for the first time. Tesla's induction motor and its cooling concepts still baffle the enthusiasts who work on this sort of thing. It was priced that way to ensure funding for future projects and reducing the cost gradually was the plan all along.

Calling those who support bitcoin "fake rich" maybe true for those who are only in it for massive gains. There is nothing wrong if they get them. Yet, people who truly understand bitcoin know that all the new use-cases for blockchain are still being discovered and this space has massive opportunity. Bitcoin, on the other hand, is a finished product which actually has many imitators but nothing like it.

Appreciate your engagement and POV but this is just false.

You describe the world of Mad Max ...

Yes, an apocalyptic world is possible, where the value is gasoline, iron, cartridges, water, medicine, weapons, etc.

Gold in such a world is also of little use.  To understand the value of gold, you need big cities, not small settlements. 

Bitcoin is not needed in such a world.  It's clear. 

However, what is the probability of such a Future?  While we are seeing completely different trends - the rejection of the real world in favor of virtual reality.  Digitalization.

for fake risky rich when you are ready to risk some money you should have opportunity to earn

Everything or work always has different risks, so only a fool wants to look rich even though he is only pretending to be rich, and for an opportunity it is clear that it must always be used in order to make a good profit, and that is only used by them the smart ones, not the ones pretending to be rich.

Yes, "nuoveau riche" is a great concept, but I didn’t refer to those ones. Those are typically already rich somehow, and are from lower social classes. Whom I referred to by “fake rich” are the ones who want to be "nuoveau riche", but are actually not, thus copy their attributes, without possessing the same wealth.

As for the Tesla - First Tesla Roadster was nearly same with Lotus Elise in design, but 2 times more expensive, was ½ seconds faster from 0 to 100 Km/h than Lotus. At the same time people could purchase Ferrari F430 Scuderia @ $187k, with 3.6s from 0 to 100 and way better design; could purchase Aston Martin DB9 @ $155k with 3.5s from 0 to 100, had great design, and had all the tech features for showing off; there were also same priced Porshe 911 Turbo, Audi R8 Quattro FSI, and in 2010 there appeared Chevrolet Camaro Callaway, Chevrolet Camaro SLP ZL575, Chevrolet Camaro Hennessey HPE700, Ford Mustang Shelby GT GeigerCars, and some others – all priced cheaper than Tesla Roadster, with way better design, mostly better interior, nearly all faster, and some of them with all the fancy tech.

Thus from the actual end-user perspective (average Joe who doesn’t care about the “green trend”) Tesla was significantly inferior car from unknown manufacturer. But it’s not the car-discussion topic, thus let’s not take community’s attention toward cards, but happy to discuss in DM if you wish, or on dedicated thread if there’s any.

And you are absolutely correct about Bitcoin – for the ones who truly understand what it is what it is, it’s really revolutionary. However, I think there are very few of those. Majority in it are for gains only, as you could see even from the comments above. Therefore, I think you are actually correct, but for very small group of people, while the majority, unfortunately are not like that.





I don't think gold would be useful in big city only, but yes, overall I do agree with all your points. And even with the virtualization of life I do tend to agree with all the digital things, VR/AR, etc. But dinosaurs also didn't expect an apocalypse. Yet, I do know such scenario is absurd and doesn't require consideration :D But as you saw from above "fake rich" concept is proven here not only in the apocalyptic scenario.




So you are distinguishing 2 types of "fake rich" - smart ones who exploit human psychological inefficiencies, and the stupid ones who just want to show off :D Great point - I also think so!

what about Bitcoin-crazy rich Indians, having btc  which is real money does make you upper class

What is wealth?  

The landowners were rich.  The land was real wealth.  Also, wealth is slaves.  Slaves cultivate the land, and landowners get rich.  

Then loan capital appeared.  Gold has become valuable.  Derivatives for gold, such as promissory notes, emerged.  The bill is very handy if you are traveling.  

The financial elite gradually began to dominate the landlords.  Then industrial capital arose.  The capitalists began to compete with the financiers.  There were stocks, bonds ... Slavery was abolished.  The landlords finally lost power.  

In the XXI century, IT technologies have developed.  The problem arose of the redistribution of wealth from capitalists and financiers to IT specialists.  One of the instruments for this redistribution of wealth is Bitcoin.  

Many IT pros in the 21st century have become millionaires thanks to bitcoin.

I guess there are not only the "Bitcoin-crazy rich Indians", but other nationals as well. But irrespective of that, their wealth is not stable - today it's $50m, tomorrow only half of that, and they are not that rich as they thought. With the real rich, that's not the case to such a great extend.

You made great points! I tend to agree to the most part, however, I believe with the emergence of financial elite, the history might not have been exactly as you described. Even the largest industrialists were financed by banks and investors (i.e. financial elite). Even during the WWII war, Hitler was financed by elites. With tech millionaires, same - they obtain capital from VCs who in turn have LPs in the form of banks, insurance companies, large funds, etc. - thus also, either directly or indirectly financed by elites. You cut their cheap capital flow and they all will die together with their "unicorns". And that's just the surface fin elites, and we didn't even discuss the Fed, BIS, IMF, WB, SWIFT, and those supranational ones who exist above and beyond the state's reach.

With the current tech development, its fairly easy to identify and track everyone who is dealing with BTC (good example is Alipay in China blocking accounts of OTC BTC traders; and same for banks). So when/if needed SWIFT could easily stop processing all BTC-related USD payments, thus stopping FX currency dealing in BTC as well, and we could be just exchanging BTC for cash or for pizzas on the offline p2p basis.

Actually if you see all the assets that you have mentioned were tangibles. Even a stock is tangible as indirectly there are the net assets that you get of the company working to appreciate it's price. Derivatives derive their price from these stocks and bonds only. But Bitcoin has no physical asset below it. The antminers or hardwares mining Bitcoin cannot be said to be bitcoin's infrastructure. Therefore to be honest it is merely a line of code. But yes coming to fiat too it's also a sentence promised by the government. So yes it's difficult to draw a direct comparison between both the things. But this does not makes you fake rich. As long as the line of code can be sold in the market at price this high you have no problems at all and same is the case with the fiat money. And if you are so naive to say that governments can fall easily and make your fiat useless there are equal chances of bitcoin pricing falling down to $1000 again.

What a load of BS from the OP? Iphone and Tesla cost more, because they offer the best quality. Instead of an iPhone, you can always go for a phone with similar specs from Xiaomi, which will cost around 80% less than the Apple product. But it won't give you the same quality as that of iPhone. Also, you can go for Nissan Leaf instead of Tesla Model 3. But again, it won't give you the same range or battery life. So these products are not overpriced. Rather, they are fairly priced and people are ready to buy them at these prices. Same is the case with BTC as well.

Yes, everything I've written is a simplified version of what's really going on. 

For example, most modern landowners in Great Britain are families with lineages dating back to the time of William the Conqueror.  This is a testament to how slowly the change of elites in the world is. 

Landowners, financiers and industrialists rule the world at the same time.  They interact very closely with each other. 

Nevertheless, each stage of technological development gives new people a chance to become members of the global elite. 

Early Bitcoin holders also have this chance.

This post is sponsored by an anti-Bitcoin evangelist who thinks bringing in pseudoscience crap would bite off a true Bitcoiner... there are instances given in too many journals by different scholars around the world about the possibility of the internet being shut down which is close not happening.. The Europeans are investing heavily in the stability of cellular network globally, if there are some imaginary apocalyptic humans to dominate the universe by shutting the technological advancement  consider it void already.. 

Imagine how you could use bitcoin easily by just accessing an internet available device, no third party approval unlike the centralised banking system which is even more targeted by such destroyers... 

I disagree with you completely.

iPhones, Tesla might be overpriced "products" which the middle class might buy just to feel that he will be "rich" but bitcoin isn't a product, it's a currency itself.

There might come a time when something unnatural might happen causing no phone, internet and electricity but I don't see that coming for the next couple of centuries!

When that time comes, all bitcoin will have been mined long before that. And probably, human species will also go extinct. So who cares when that happens, everything will be destroyed let alone fiat or Bitcoin!

Indeed, sometimes people having an Iphone or things with signature brands like Gucci etc. etc. is just a product of social media pressure. Some people tend to push themselves going on what's hot despite of inability to sustain such things — being social climber at its finest.

But in the case of bitcoin, you are not considered social climber when you have one simply because you are investing. Imagine, you can be a trader even having a small capital only. Nice, isn't it? Thus, Financial Literate is a much better term for you ;).
That's right lol. Mankind is not that dumb anymore. We can fix it. The only problem with us is that we are doing damage on this planet even though we are aware of it so I hope we will realize in the future what we done wrong before its too late.

But still - you can not call BTC "fake wealth". It's like calling an Apple stockholder a beggar just because he's holding Apple stock instead of dollars.
The state in which the cryptocurrency now is the same shares of Apple or IBM just in a different form.
But at the same time, when switching to the" natural "value of the cryptocurrency, it will also not be called" fake wealth " because it will already be a full - fledged means of payment. Quite a subtle and slippery question, in general.

I think great point! In such manner, we might come to a point when air would be also sold and traded, just like the "line of code" (Bitcoin) is traded now. World changes, and assets might also change. Yet, some of them survived wars, revolutions, government falldowns, epidemics, etc. for thousands of years, while some just emerged in the past 10 years, and we already all know will not exist after the next 10-50 years once quantum computers become a daily reality of every common person.




Do you really believe ipone and tesla offer the best quality ::) Think again ...





You purposely right in a way to make me agree with all your points? :D Because I agree with this as well. And yes, early BTC holders also have a chance to become the next elites deeply rooted in the global economy, but... that depends on 1) whether they are capable enough to rally make that transmission - from "tech freaks trading hype-priced lines of codes" to "financial elites affecting global politics and economy", and 2) whether the old elites permit them to do so... recently SEC and other institutionalised watchdogs had shown an increasing efficiency in taking down those "ex-crypto - to-be elites millionaire". And the case with Ant Group in China showed that the financial elites won't give up their spots so easily even to "traditional / non-crypto" tech oligarchs.




Could you please point out specifically who would sponsor such post, and we would get in touch with them directly? :D And I believe you either didn't read the post and all comments well, or you "see the words, but don't get the meaning" thats why you are making such accusations.




Yes, your last sentence is exactly to the point! However, don't forget the tech side of BTC and the fact that once quantum computers become a part of regular daily life - yours, mine and anyone's BTC will be useless peace of code, as it was in the first few days when it was created. But fiat, will remain... gold will remain... factories will remain... land will remain.




Loved your comment! Very great point which wasn't mentioned by anyone before. For anything - fiat, gold, iPhone, Tesla, watches, Bitcoin - whatever, - appropriate conditions must exist in order to function as they should and in order to be of any value. But over time, the environments have changed many times, and conditions too - some assets, or "things" remained unchanged for thousands of years. Others came, became popular, attracted attention and just to make some people earn a lot of money on the expense of late-comers. Of course, I am not claiming BTC is one of them for sure, but yet it could be... only time will show and we can get back to this post after 50-100 years to see what happened and how changed :)




Aren't you? You should try telling your old friends whom you didn't see for a long time, or who are super far from BTC/crypto/tech/finance that you are BTC-holder since 20XX and you will see the difference. BTC might have not been created for that purpose (or it was - idk; just don't tend to easily believe to what is written or spoken by some people), but as you can see in 2018 and now in the end of 2020, it is happening.




Great point! But Apple's shareholders they don't own a share of iPhone and don't call themselves "iPhone evangelists" (imagine if they would :D). They own a company with real production facilities, with real brand (yes Bitcoin is establishing its brand now with the help of community), if something goes wrong - they can get all Apple's assets and infrastructure and liquidate it via bankruptcy procedures and get cash, but when you will be able to hold a quantum-powered phone in your pocket, like any other person having iPhone now, whom we all can go to sue and ask for asset liquidation and repayments?.. Furthermore, as a regular BTC-holder you barely know how you can individually affect the network or make any change, but if you are a minority shareholder of Apple - you can do quite a lot of things actually. But yes, depending on personal beliefs, philosophy, pre-set of norms we follow, and willingness to expand or direct own thinking towards specific ideas, such question as the one posted here is a very slippery question.

How's quantum computer can actually destroy Bitcoin or blockchain lmao? They are vastly two different products. One is a public ledger, and other is technology. Even though, what you are saying makes little sense, but you are referring to a future which is many many decades after of. So, it doesn't matter at all with respect to today. If needed, Bitcoin will also get replaced by something better in future.

Also, aren't you being contradictory when you say that there will be a calamity when all internet and phones and everything will be destroyed, but at the same time land, fiat will remain still? Lmao. When internet, phones and everything gets destroyed, so gets destroyed land, money and even human species.

You actually are absolutely right. I don't know if that was sarcasm or what but I feel air and water might also get listed soon on Commodities exchanges if the scarcity of both so remains and increases. I Mean if you see the commodities exchange something very basic which started like a utility like power too is being traded on exchanges so what's the problem with air and water? Once we reach a time where you have to pay for it you might see Air and water derivatives getting listed on exchanges for sure. But yes talking about Bitcoin obviously you are right that we might see quantum computers which could end bitcoin but are you going to hold your cryptos for so long? I mean let's be pretty honest. No one plans to hold it for the next 30-40 years what I am trying to say is that if something has value and demand which is likely to sustain until next 5-7 years there is no harm in speculating on such a thing for time less than that.

"How's quantum computer can actually destroy Bitcoin or blockchain lmao?" - Seriously?.. I assume you having a Full Member rank here do understand how DLT works, and what are the potential effects of new type of computing, such as quantum can have on it. As for the decades in order for such technology to come into effect, please do check the latest news from IBM, Google, and the Chinese firms' developments in this area. It's gonna be within our lifetime when we will see actual quantum computers in work (maybe not in your pocket like a phone yet), and then you could tell me what is the effect :) But don't forget, people in 40s-50s also were saying that thousands of years will pass before everyone in the world could have a personal portable computer at home... Less than 100 years passed and you have it in your pocket to check IG, TW, etc.


I am not sure how you see the connection between the destruction of tech, and land at the same time. But I guess we just have different understand of the potential situation which was described.




Nope, I wasn't sarcastic at all. Because as you probably know - there are already futures on water ;D https://www.cmegroup.com/trading/equity-index/us-index/nasdaq-veles-california-water-futures.html And yes, with such development: "securitized energy" -> "securitized line of code" -> "securitized water" -> "securitized air" could well be the next step (btw we securitize value - entirely new concept (not self-promotion)). Actually, we, internally had a concept long-time ago about new financial products that could emerge in the future also, and actually as you mentioned - scarcity and global demand & essential need for this "asset" can be good characteristics for the potential securitization. So if you want to predict what might come next, you could take a look at Maslow's Pyramid and try to imagine what constitutes different levels of the pyramid (water, air, food, are parts Psychological Needs for example, and almost all have been securitized by now) you could potentially predict what might be securitized next. But as for BTC you are absolutely right. Most of the people won't hold it for that long, no matter how loud they scream that they will HODL it forever. Being a human creates, even if they buy BTC today @ around $23,000, they will be happily screaming and selling if/when BTC reaches $100k or $1m. So yes, for sure there's no harm in speculating such things, same as with Tulips in 1637  ;)

I will even say more that all these super-rich people from the top ten richest people on the planet do not keep all their funds in the form of Fiat cash or in Bank deposits, but keep the bulk of their capital in the form of shares or shares in their business. Recently, the mass media slipped information about Elon Musk who does not have his own money and he constantly borrows it from others for living and food, so all this talk about fake wealth is both true and false.

But it will exist? As long as there are bitcoin nodes running and preserving the ledger, your assets will completely safe.

And do you think that it is plausible that the internet will just disappear for an extended period of time while billions of people have already come to rely on it, and hundreds of millions make a living off of it? Please.


I'm still confused as what exactly you mean by the "fake rich". Are the Winklevoss twins a part of the "fake rich" because they weren't as elite before BTC rallied? No, they are still two very high net worth individuals.

And even old wealth is flocking towards BTC right now, just look at the amount of institutional demand.

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”.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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 :D), 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 :D), 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 :D

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.

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 :D)

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.

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 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.

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.

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 :D 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.

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 :D), 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...

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.

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.

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.

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" :D 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?

I would say you are correct, but I think with current hype over BTC not really. Just check the Twitter among others how much people now are bragging showing off how smart they were to buy BTC @$20k or higher.




Well true and not I think. What you said makes totally perfect sense, but with stocks - if everyone sold them and price crash to 0, you still own a company. The company can go bankrupt or go private via de-listing. With gold - you still own a metal that you can use for other means. With house - you can live in it or in the worst case make something from it (bar, club, restaurant, hotel, something). But what happens when BTC price goes to zero? Yes some people will want to buy all, but for what purpose if it stays permanently at $0 afterwards?

And yes, the health of economy does define the market on funamentals, but at the same time, the fundamentals are also defined by the market. That's why market is (said to be) including all available information in the world in its pricing. Yes can be manipulated and inflated, but overall that manipulation from philosophical perspective won't take place if manipulator won't believe that s/he cannot benefit from it in the future which does in turn some future growth potential due to illicit reasons.


Also great point which I missed. From such perspective would you agree that first iPhones same with Bitcoin were created for the good reasons, however ended up being misused by the society for other reasons? Just like nuclear power wasn't invented for the purposes of mass destruction. (as for Tesla, sorry but I will not agree that it was a good product in the beginning :D)

Thanks for your serious questions about the idea, I try to answer all of them, hope to convince you and the others may read these posts and are interested in.

"people are people". That’s the point. People supposed to be people, with all their greed, passion, bias, good wills, morals and taboo, and if a solution supposed to work, has to work with the “people” literally.

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.
This methodology follows old model of civilization where the elite (or who has power, or religious authority) makes the rules and the normal people had to obey. We have internet and useful tools (mainly cryptography and blockchain and many other handy tools).
What about if we change the social order and make a system in which middle class people makes the rule and put it in practice and follow their own rules. They do not need the elite decide for them. Let alone the fact that nowadays even an average Joe can analyze and decide as good as a president if he has the enough unbiased sources. I mentioned this off-topic average Joe discourses by purpose, and later we probably will come back to him!
Going back to our discussion about the “code  is law” and “who” and “how” decides about that “law”? The answer is the “system population”. The middle class people, the average Joe, the worker and the professors as well are decider about rules.
Lets re-explain the system. We prepare a “template” software. The software which is working and has too many parameters to configure it arbitrarily. Everyone (preferably non technical people) can download the software, tweak it, shape it, re-define some parts or cut the other parts or add new parts to it, and finally run it. Now s/he established a new realm which governs by her/his customized rules. s/he is the first population of this new territory. Obviously s/he starts to inviting others to her/his territory -As we know from our civilization history the more population means more powerful community-. Here are big differences between our new societies and the “early societies in human history”.
In early societies the “cost of disobedience” was too high, indeed it is still too high in our current real world. Meanwhile in our new territory it is almost zero cost.
Our hunter ancestors had to be a part of society to be survived. They had no choice. The alone man would die because of outside dangers or because of not having food to eat, or both. The necessity for being a part of a society was underlying on lowest level of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, whereas in our new societies people will join to a society because of their “believes”. Please do not misunderstood the word “believer” for its religious common usage.
I will join to community in which they respect my opinions (whatever they are), and you will do the same. So everybody join to community or society which has much respect for her/his opinion. The people with same mindset forming a society in which there is no discrimination for sex, race, nationality or Geo-location – unless the community rules was being racist rules -.
And what is the outcome of these different systems (aka communities, societies, networks, friends cycles depends on the population number and the rules they set)?
I sent another short essay and explained more details about idea from another perspective. You can find it here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5303276.0

overtime the systems, due to their nature…
Absolutely true. That’s why we have to have many different systems (like many different version or distribution of Linux) with slightly difference in rules, monetary, etc. As long as we follow our principles we join some groups or leave the other ones. For example for me the maximum decentralization is important, so I support the community with high level of decentralization and as a member of a community, I strive for more and more decentralization. Each system supports (or tolerates) a level of decentralization due to its rules, and I always select the societies with better rules. Once our human natures be freed from old fears and refreshed by new mindset, we will not the slave of our old fears and stresses, that day we already established the best society on top of this software infrastructure. It takes time and too many systems will be born and be destroyed before that day (like too many civilization we have had before, but too accelerated in sense of time). Finally there will be systems which are good for human prosperity and will survive for ever. We may or may not see that days but we have to move on. What I am pretty sure is “we are making the world a little better place and it worth to fight”.

Until the gov sees the thread and shuts down the internet?
That day will be too late to shoutdown the internet. As I told before no one take us serious, and actually it is good. We will have time to prove our ideologies and governing models and…
IMHO the government is nothing but a group of frightened people. Some of them are corrupted person as well. But the main point is the “fear”. One of our mission -in different societies and by different strategies- is “wipe out the fear”. It is a long story and I’ll explain it in another post. But for now let imagine there is no fear. If governments do not afraid about these networks why they should stop them? Obviously in short term there are “conflict of interest” and our mission is “resist the networks against all kind of adversaries”. It is about technical issues rather than philosophical matter. Every step of development (either the software itself or the societies around the software) has proper threats and solutions too, and As a technical I guarantee we can resist against all potential threats. Until the day no adversary exist “And the world will live as one”.

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?)
I think I already answered these, at the end of the day there will be “just some rules”. No government and no governors. Only people and their rules. Maybe only one society remains or a few societies, but I predict ALL of them will have same rules slightly different. BTW the rule maker will not same as what we have now. They are literally all. There will no monopoly for “Ruling class”. The “police authorities” most probably will exist just for immediate intervention in emergency cases for defense citizen rights and not for people suppression.

The “ local sub-systems of the global system” and this kind of hierarchical structures will be substituted by a kind of flat distribution of power. It will be like different two dimensional shapes that have something in common or some are totally separated islands. BTW non of these communities has superiority on the others. Of course some of them are more excellence than the other one, and since it has no cost for people to join or leave one community in favor of the other community (unlike current national borders, political regimes, communities or even ideologies), people will immigrate to most excellent community ASAP.

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.
True, so we need a thought-out schedule. They definitely wouldn't want to give up all unless they "have to" or "convinced to". We just need to keep alive the system till the point the adversaries be convince to join or give up (depends on their wisdom). We can maintain the system without compromising our ideals. We do not need billionaires at all. We are establishing communities that have their monies which worth absolutely nothing and represents only the owner will of making world better place. Over time -if the community survive – they can get some materialistic benefits of those coins too. We will run our nodes on cheap laptops. We do not need funds, super servers, advertisements, etc, etc. No, all we need is minded people and their will for making a better world.

Let me know if I missed some parts or some answers are insufficient. Meanwhile I'll prepare more stuff to share.

I believe our long-essay replies might have scared rest of community members :D

Addressing your points:

As you correctly noted that people will forever be people with their fears, biases, etc. I think we can directly conclude that they will make any system, no matter how perfect it is, biased again, so again we will come to the point where we started.

Giving the right and ability to the "average Joe" to make important decisions might be not the most optimal solution, as myself forexample being non-expert in BioTech, I shouldn't be making any decisions there, but if given chance - I will (who knows?) then depending on "who scream louder" the rest of the crowd will follow the wrong source. Or, alternatively, if the society is smart enough, they will abandon the "average Joe's" proposition, and will naturally concentrate power around the ones with real knowledge and expertise (say in BioTech for example) and those, being humans by nature, will start to abuse the system again via the use of their new power.

I personally think that experts should make decisions on the area they are better than others, but if you let others make those decisions (including laws or codes) - it will be pretty. inefficient. Like if in simple terms - letting average person who knows nothing about tech and only cares about drinking beer in front of TV in the evening, decide about complex systems with consideration of advanced subjects from game theory,  might be not the most optimal decision for the system population overall. That's partially related to off-topic discussion USA vs. China. In the US nearly every opinion was respected, while in China - not at all. And as a consequence, because too many people got their own opinion and scream very loud in the US, we have what we have, while in China government just silence the ones who disturb public order, and now it's on the way to become #1 economy in the world. Isn't that illustrative, that every opinion around the world, should not be respected and tolerated. Of course freedom of speech and self-expression is a basic human right and must be available to anyone, but not in the cases where it represents threat to the public order and social wellbeing.

And based on the proposed software, it's will be same with current KOLs inviting their followers to other communities. Like IG KOL inviting all followers to follow them on YouTube, vs. "average Joe" inviting his FB friends to join his TG channel. The result with the new software will be same - effortless joining/leaving the community, and nearly same powers as they have in the current conditions.

I wrote another longer essay on your thread, and was going to reply there, but since you mentioned will continue here :D

About having many different systems / sub-systems where everyone can join/rejoin/leave any at any time, how would that be different from the current world? The strongest countries will make obstacles for you to leave them / join new ones (citizenship of USA vs. citizenship of Cyprus for example), while we have all these social networks and apps that are born and die nearly every year, where people make sub-communities and micro-communities based on interests and anyone can join or leave any at no cost? The only difference I see here is creation of token/coin/currency within those sub-communities (which is not that necessary after all), but the rest is pretty same.

And about the gov shutting everything down - it's well possible any moment when needed. In the world there are only few trans-national cables that host the entire WWW, and governments have control over flow and can cut it off if really needed, though it's pretty extreme measure, but we have seen countries doing so in the past few years.

As for the last point about running nodes from cheap computers, that again comes to the same issue with BTC. Yes, you can allow just anyone from anywhere to run a node. But if I have right now $1,000,000, and you have only $100 - I can buy 10,000 cheap PCs, and you can buy only 1, so I will be more powerful again - same as without the new system, but with old fiat / asset way. Yes, you can say that it's possible to limit somehow number of PCs or computing power per user, which might be possible to implement (I don't know how actually, but let's assume it's possible), I can ask all my friends and relatives to let me use their identity or computing power for my own needs (since they might be not so tech savvy they won't care about what they give to me), and then I could pay to other people to get their computing powers & IDs. So again - who got the deepest pockets will control the majority of network.

I believe our long-essay replies might have scared rest of community members
I hope they enjoyed reading the long texts and the serious discussions. Since the rest of internet is full of spam posts, memes and funny cats and… if they like.
I hope more people participate in this thread in order to finally do something serious and accomplish real work, not just complaining the world and endless talks.
As I supposed you are misunderstood the point. I admit it is hard to form the big picture, and needs some days to shape it. So I start from another point of view.

As you correctly noted that people will forever be people with their fears, biases, etc...
As a normal person can you please answer these questions honestly?
A: say you are in a situation that you have to decide to do act X or not do. You -because of your morality or believes- believe the true reaction is doing act X.
A1. will you do act X  if you knew doing act X has no cost for you?
A2. will you do act X  if you knew doing act X (being good person) will cost you a little (may be you lost some dollars).
A3. will you do act X  if you knew doing act X (being good person) will cost highly (say loosing your house).

B: say you are in a situation that you have to decide about the act that person Y already did. You must declare your opinion about that act. was it a good act or bad act. And you already convinced that Y did the bad job.
B1. will you vote Y did bad job if you knew this declaration has no cost for you?
B2. will you vote Y did bad job if you knew this declaration has small cost for you?
B3. will you vote Y did bad job if you knew this declaration has too cost for you?

Your answer most probably in cases A1 and B1 will be yes. Like other 99 percent of human.
Your answer in cases A2 and B2 depends on your “core values”. The another important factor for your decision is the society in which you are make this decision. In other word, you alone have less than 6 percent chance to scarify your benefit in favor of truth. But you looking to the society you are living and considering other people and the morality norms, in most societies the likelihood of the yes answer will be higher than 50 percent.
And always there will be less than .005 percent of society which in cases A3 and b3 will say yes.
I over simplified the situation for the sake of time, but the points are
1. reduce the cost of being good actor.
2. increase the chance of resonate, amplitude and synergy the goodwill of society members.
By these 2 strategies we are using literally our human nature (and do not forget human nature isn’t only bad habits :) ) to improve our life condition.

Giving the right and ability to the "average Joe" to make important decisions…
I made a mistake about talking about Joe too soon, may I ask you to talk about it later, but just a hint for thinking, do you agree “right now, most of important decisions are not taken by experts or specialists, vice versa they are taken by greedy and corrupted politicians”? And most of time the decisions are contrary to experts. A simple example! Do you believe we have insufficient agriculture resources (globally) and because of that we cannot eliminate under-nutrition? In reality, we have more than enough, but “they” had decided to rule the world in this way. Now, where is the “intelligence” about this bad management done by “elite”, comparing the average Joe decision to “not wasting foods”?  

USA vs. China….
The first economy in the world, the GDP, Economic growth indicators, … all are wrong addressing.
I am not a money hater, I like it, but there is a big fail in our mentality and rationality, particularly in economic. We take the resources (land, oil, cereals, livestock, water,…) and transform it to something else, in order to use it or consume it for another kind of product. In these transformations we increase the value of materials. The grape transforms to wine. Its values from x dollar increases to 4X. We created 3X value that we compensate it by something we call it money. So if you need more money you have to transform more and more grape to wine. So you have to sell your wins in order to get 3X money. You encourage people to drink more and more and over consumption, even they were saturated. Meanwhile you will not sell wine to poor countries for 1X benefit, even if they are dieng because of thirst.  Because you want 3X benefit, because of economic reason! What is the consequence? You are the biggest wine company in the world. You created 2000000000000000X value of growth in one year and you are rich. This 2000000000000000X dollar represents nothing than you ruined  2000000000000000X unit of grape. The resource that we have no replacement for that and we could use it wisely in next 1000 years! Is it rational? At the end what can you do with your 2000000000000000X dollar? You will invest it in another business to do the same catastrophe? Or FED prints another trillion dollars and devaluate your 2000000000000000X dollar to 1000000000000000X dollar! In best case (in sense of humanity and our civilization) you can be Warren Buffett and donate 99 percent of your wealth for common goods and charities. But can you tell me how much cost -directly/indirectly- you (Buffet) imposed on human condition?
There must be some reasonable reason for economic growth. The growth because of the growth itself has no sense. Do you agree? The growth because of competition (caused by fear) is even worse. Isn’t it?


About having many different systems / sub-systems where everyone can join/rejoin/leave any at any time, how would that be different from the current world? The strongest countries will make obstacles for you to leave them / join new ones (citizenship of USA vs. citizenship of Cyprus for example), while we have all these social networks and apps that are born and die nearly every year, where people make sub-communities and micro-communities based on interests and anyone can join or leave any at no cost? The only difference I see here is creation of token/coin/currency within those sub-communities (which is not that necessary after all), but the rest is pretty same.

This is the part that I like to talk about the most. You probably didn’t read the other article in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5303276.0
you can find the answer of some of your point there. Here I’ll explain some major difference between my proposed software and the other social networks.
The main difference is “data sovereignty”. The “data” refers ALL your personal information and ALL content you create.  The “data sovereignty” refers to your data and the “treatment rules”. In my proposed social network, user own her/his data, s/he decides to how treat with her/his data. To whom show what, or what to be shown to user. Both are important and nowadays both are controlled by corporate s. They do not care users privacy and ownership of the data. They can ban or disable users account. They decide what feed to your personal page and your eyes and finally your mind. It is the way they control you, gaslight you and govern you. The majority do not feel that and indeed they do not care at all. Here the currency comes to the picture. Now people will care about their community. They hope the value of the money (tokens, shares or credit) of their community, which they have earned grow up over time and make benefit. So they start to constructive interact with community, cultivate their “common world”, learn and educate the principles, help to rise up community reputation and strengthen their money. These societies are not like a Facebook group or an online forum, because they make “their own rules” and not company rules. They set “their premier goals”, and finally they have an index to measure their excellence.
It will not like “IG KOL inviting all followers to follow them on YouTube”. It is inviting people to freedom and “data sovereignty”.
One of those hundreds or thousands communities will be the “imagine” community. One that starts in a super centralized governing and moves toward super decentralized system day by day. I already sat its rules and monetary system. There are complicated mechanisms and I have to explain them in other thread -which I’ll do it soon-. So I can guarantee at least one community will exist that its goals are:
1. developing and maintaining the software itself in a most democratic and flexible possible way. Either development style or software features. (Obviously an open source and free software license).
2. developing and re-developing the community in order to implement maximum level of decentralization (either in rules or principles).
3. establishing an alternate “value system” in which who helps more the globe, gains more and maintain this rule as the “core value” of society.
These plans never happened in history and it is the first time in history that people can benefit because of their altruism action. I am pretty sure the model will work.
Even if we fail, we have built a system (including software and culture) that gifts too many good things, and on which the next people can do the next experiences. Isn't it clear that we have to do it regardless of the outcome?

And about the gov shutting everything down…
At the moment, this does not threaten us. It is an extreme exaggerated scenario that never won’t happened. Are you talking about North Korea or United State that 99 percent of vital activities are highly dependent to Internet?
Although In my design there are complementary solutions for dictatorship countries with high level of censorship and oppression, IP banning, low speed internet, and all other barriers for commercial, high speed services we are using freely in Europe and US.
This is not our today problem, once our community gathered hundreds of hacktivists and “specialists” who really care about human prosperity we will implement new solutions - instead of dummy, ineffective, neutral, useless, hard to use and incomplete, elite like solutions that now we are doing just to “hide the fact that we are actually do nothing”-


As for the last point about running nodes from cheap computers,…
It is quite possible some community emerge based on hash power or another system resources – e.g. ram, memory space, or even printer resolution :) - so who has more money earn more. But it is not the case. There is possibility to emerge another societies with different “value system” as well.
As an example I can tell you about “imagine” society which I am aware of. In imagine there are three option to earn society “shares” and “coins”.
    A: A Skilled people can directly involve in software development, testing, documenting, design, translation, tutorial staffs, etc.  her/his contribution will be compensate by shares in proportion to the hours (and quality of work) she/he did for system.
    B: An entrepreneur can hire developers/translators,… and pay them fiat money as their salary and propose that accomplished task to community in exchange of the shares of community network.
    C: An investor or a normal person with small capital can buy the coins or shares from other early adapters who did A or B.
BTW in early days (first 3 or 4 years) the coins and shares worth nothing, so no one will pay fiat money for those. It is a big chance for encourage people to do “real job” to make a “real product” that impacts on “real world”. No meaningless trading, No greedy speculation, No abusing the words like Blockchain, decentralization, cryptocurrency, smart contract. Instead educating and experiencing real meaning of decentralization.
Surely people will try to use(misuse) our software to fool others, cheat, fraud, make money, etc, etc. But we have an strong feature. “power of fragility”. Most of them before accomplish first cents will be disgraced.
Again as an example, in “imagine” community who will take the majority of network which helped the software more. And the software is free. So the outcome will be a great software by which people can establish other communities (either for making a new community and running their rules and money or simply because of being frustrated because of abused by social network companies and selling them and their freedom to market).
I described “imagine” community partially, hopefully you establish another greater community with greater rules that works better than “imagine”. That day definitely I’ll join to your community and leave that primitive “imagine” community and I’ll help your community members to achieve more excellence.
It is how the things will happened in our software. Just to speak precisely, the software name is “Comen” stands for Community Maker Engine.

@OP, what exactly is your intention behind asking this? Is it that you expect us to tell you whether BTC is for the fake rich or not? Or are you trying hard to prove whether it's already in the possession of such people who are solely wanting nothing but a number which multiplies every single minute, hour, day, week, etc. I know that it's not good to see BTC so high because it feels like we missed the train, or lost an opportunity, and now crying. But it's also true that we had a chance earlier, so crying now makes no sense at all. Same will be the case in future.

There are always chances and multiple falls and also ups of the exchange rate price of bitcoin for someone a reason to cry, and for someone a chance for wealth. The current rise in the price of bitcoin may lead to a strong correction again, because previous history has already shown us similar examples. About the fake rich. Such characters will always find a way to show their status, but to say that bitcoin is designed for this is stupid. Bitcoin is above that. At the bitcoin is a much more popular target for the application and purpose.

The intention was only to see people's opinion, nothing more than that. And I was happy to see and hear from all of you what you think about the analogy which I presented. But speaking of the "missed train" thing, I am sure after 5-10 years we will come here again, and many people will say that they also missed the train on BTC when it costed $30k, because by that time it might cost $100k or more.




Well we have no way to know the true motivation of the creator(s) of BTC. People frequently say/write one thing, but have an opposite or hidden intention which we all will never know. Apart from that, BTC could be or could not be designed for that, now is being misused based on what we commonly believe is true from what we read about Bitcoin - that's something many others agreed about here too.

but the price of an item as you say is decreasing every day so someone can buy it after it has been out for maybe more than 1 year and the price has gone down in the 30-50% range, so in the long run it won't really affect someone's finances if they buy it based on need and have enough money.
while bitcoin value can go up and down depending on demand but in the long run its value is sure to go up.
so between goods and commodities is very clear.

People who use bitcoin already experienced the power and value of it. Those who become rich through bitcoin is a real rich and not fake. Bitcoin is volatile, this means that its value can go up and down where everyone has an opportunity to buy and own a large part of bitcoin and become rich. Many are now adopting and investing in bitcoin because they know why bitcoin was created and what is the use of it. We are in a new generation which almost everything are computer generated which is need an internet and electricity. So, I think there is no possibility that the power supply and internet will disappear even in the future.

So you think bitcoin is a ponzi lol, how near sighted are you.  If people use bitcoin to "buy" things then how can it be a money grab?  You aren't the first and you won't be the last to say it :/

I agree with your idea mate. Worst possible scenarious are meteor  impact and electromagnetic pulse attack where we don't know what will really happen but one thing is for sure economies and of course lives will be gone except for the gods money which is the precious stones and metals.

I agree that BTC price is volatile, however, it's not a clear thing that "in the long run its value is sure to go up". It really depends on the investment time-frame. If 10-20 years is the long-term - then yes, definitely, if it's the real long-term 100-500 years - then I wouldn't be so sure.




Yes, you are correct, however, there have been precedents among certain states of shutting down internet and electricity (if we exclude the post-apocalyptical scenario). But generally I tend to agree with you.




That's the common understanding of Bitcoin btw in the market. Just very illustrative of how majority sees it :D I would say 60% admit they see it like that, 30% say they really believe in Bitcoin, but actually don't want to admit that they are part of those 60%, and probably on the rest of 10% are the actual believers.




Do you mean gold and diamonds? :D So you do admit that under the extreme stress-testing only the few things/assets will be left valuable which were tested for thousands of years, unlike the currently dominant or overhyped ones?

actually it is not fake once you withdraw that's fine

Which code you're discussing?. Is it wallet id for sure ? or possibly you're thinking about the satoshi as the code.
When you purchase bitcoin, you gather some number called a satoshi, so it's not the code. It is genuine cash.
At any rate, you're rich as long as you hold your speculation.
Counterfeit rich can be considered for the individuals who put their all cash in bitcoin to begin dreaming of getting wealthy in nights.
Yet, things never happen that way. It relies upon us how we deal with our speculation to get rich.

I think that every cryptocurrency user who previously invested profitably in the most rated cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, today they have every opportunity to just sleep at night and dream about how high these cryptocurrencies will rise. But this is quite realistic, given the current bullish race, if you do not take into account the last correction.

In post-apocalyptic world those hundreds of people who will survive will definitely think not about BTC, treasures or dollars, they will think about food, roof over the head and some clothes to wear. But we are not in post-apocalyptic world now. We live in interesting time when people taught how to make money from "nothing". They trade in exchanges, hodl BTC and some stocks and are quite happy that they have profit and don't have to work somewhere on plants or do other dirty work. Are they "fake rich"? Not really. If they can exchange their assets on fiat and buy everything they need for their lives than they're clever people who learnt how to live in this world and in this time.

I don't think so, bitcoiners don't have time for frivolity. We are more aware of how the market works than to be wearing anything that could indicate some type of wealth. Sometimes we are anonymous because we fear the underworld. Although it could be the case but our culture is not to be showy rather sometimes we act in a low profile.
We do not want to make public that we own X bitcoin because we do not have the proper security when we are not really rich to pay for security.

As long as bitcoin is valuable, it makes no difference what its value is based on. It is recognized as the same as the value of any other currency in the world and also has a measure of the value of any currency.
When a global catastrophe occurs, not only cryptocurrencies will disappear, but almost all current state currencies will disappear. After all, then no one can guarantee their value. However, it may happen that a catastrophe can only have a man-made character, when for some reason only the Internet and certain types of high-tech communications can disappear. A weapon may also appear that will disable everything that uses electronics. Then paper money will remain, and all non-cash money, including cryptocurrency, will disappear.

Lol, we can't really compare commodities to investments. Some of these commodities are necessary like furniture, good beds, a good room and decoration which sometimes goes into our "need" list instead of "wants" and sometimes it even includes as our status increases like cars, phones, gadgets etc. We gotta need these commodities even if their prices go down in long run :P

Nothing new under the sky, it is very usual that people want to show their best image and looks and that they spend money, sometimes borrowed money in doing so, call it a Tesla, a Rolex, jewels, ... most of the luxury industry is built on that. i do no see that as unusual.

Is bitcoin part of that? Nah... it may be for some people but bitcoin is something you cannot go a show around (or at least you should not if you know what you are doing) and yes, it is digital, just the money you hold in your bank: an electronic record and nothing else.

I just do not find anything worth in this argument. BTW you do not own a piece of code.