> The point is that the most-work chain is allowed to be ignored if the politics are done right.
If the best argument against PoW is that people can ignore it, then I don't know what to say to you. Like, don't let me stop you then: go run a Bitcoin miner that ignores PoW, and see if you can convince anyone else to accept your forked coins at 1:1 parity with real Bitcoin.
> Maybe a picture will help
I never once brought up monetary policy, so I'm just going to ignore what you wrote about it. You're answering questions I never asked.
> PoW is ultimately subject to politics which means the whole system is subject to politics.
PoW is ultimately subject to market forces. Miners regularly switch between Bitcoin and BCash, depending on what's profitable at the moment. This indicates that miners are not loyal to any ideology; they're only trying to optimize revenue. Thus the simplest explanation as to why Bitcoin has a much higher PoW than BCash is that Bitcoin has higher demand. Hate to break it to you, but the market has spoken -- there's far more demand for Bitcoin than BCash.
But, let's not mistake that for some grand conspiracy against it. No one is stopping BCash from overtaking Bitcoin; the onus is on the BCash project to convince people to value it more than Bitcoin.
> If the best argument against PoW is that people can ignore it, then I don't know what to say to you. Like, don't let me stop you then:
Your counter-argument is "try it, then!". I'm not sure why I have to say this and we can't have an intelligent conversation, but here we go: just because something is possible to do and an argument can be made for its possibility, that doesn't mean that I specifically have the means to pull it off. And talking about my capacity to pull it off derails us from having a meaningful discussion about the potential attack. You're not discussing in good faith I think...
> I never once brought up monetary policy, so I'm just going to ignore what you wrote about it
It wasn't about monetary policy, that was just the context. It was about how the hashrate just goes where the money is, and the money is subject to politics, therefore PoW is subject to politics.
but anyway if you're not going to read my comments, we can't have any meaningful exchange here... especially since you're trying to make this about the BCash cryptobean for some reason, but my point has nothing to do with it. My point is about Proof of Work being ultimately useless.
If the best argument against PoW is that people can ignore it, then I don't know what to say to you. Like, don't let me stop you then: go run a Bitcoin miner that ignores PoW, and see if you can convince anyone else to accept your forked coins at 1:1 parity with real Bitcoin.
> Maybe a picture will help
I never once brought up monetary policy, so I'm just going to ignore what you wrote about it. You're answering questions I never asked.
> PoW is ultimately subject to politics which means the whole system is subject to politics.
PoW is ultimately subject to market forces. Miners regularly switch between Bitcoin and BCash, depending on what's profitable at the moment. This indicates that miners are not loyal to any ideology; they're only trying to optimize revenue. Thus the simplest explanation as to why Bitcoin has a much higher PoW than BCash is that Bitcoin has higher demand. Hate to break it to you, but the market has spoken -- there's far more demand for Bitcoin than BCash.
But, let's not mistake that for some grand conspiracy against it. No one is stopping BCash from overtaking Bitcoin; the onus is on the BCash project to convince people to value it more than Bitcoin.