Socialism is based on equality and social ownership. What economic equality (the one Engels wrote about in Anti-Dühring) can we say when significant production powers are in one wealthy hand, when the creator has such power, and capitalist banks accumulate funds through unfair income redistribution and playing on volatilities. When we talk about social order, we must take into account the question of power. the usual average worker (who somehow accumulated funds for an entrance ticket) cant exerting economic influence on bitcoin, while super large players have such an opportunity.
All that Bitcoin takes from socialism that is Marx parfume for libertarian core.
So, I think you actually don't really understand how bitcoin operates as a technical level. While this is off-topic, it could be brought on-topic about actually using the implementation of Bitcoin as an example. However, I'm going to argue the merits because it's literally the thread, and you probably actually believe what you say is true from an socialist-economics standpoint rather than the actual technical implementation of bitcoin.
---
So, mining *bitcoin* is resource based, so economics can play a role into it, but at the technical core the concept was "proof-of-work".
Proof-of-work for Bitcoin is the sha256 hash. Which back when it came out, was pretty standard (and still good today).
In a large distributed system, the majority of the workers would control the the rules. This is done by all the workers sharing and collaborating, and distributing new rules.
From an ideological standpoint, that seems very socialist. However, in recent years, the sha256 hash really has been attacked. ASICs are literally purposely built devices to mine BTC. It's kinda crazy that people make chips to be the "best worker". The problem is because they're the overwhelming majority that has invested into this very specific purpose, they're going to continue this production.
In reality, the same could be said about socialism.