I think you missed my point, which is that if the PoW can be outsourced, then it is always more economical to do it on an ASIC farm near to cheap hydropower. Thus the mining PoW in Iota will trend to professional miners same as for Satoshi's design! They haven't accomplished anything at all because the economics of mining remains centralizing!
It will only centralise like that if it becomes profitable enough for any such ASIC farm to do that work, compared to the reward they might achieve mining a coin with a block reward with all that expensive hardware.
If you don't understand the incentive to redo the PoW share for each Iota transaction, then please re-read the
upthread discussion where in one of the other attacks on Iota that I contemplated (and posted about), CfB explained that attack could only be thwarted by allowing PoW shares to be recomputed without forcing them to be resigned. I understood why in the context of the upthread discussion with CfB. I prefer to not rediscuss the reasoning again (redundant, makes the thread too long, and my time/energy is scarce).
I was saying I wasn't clear on the incentive for
others to redo the POW, as in, not the payers. It's clear the payers have an incentive, but this implies payers must always be online and monitoring to achieve reliability, which I don't think is an acceptable compromise. This is more likely to result in centralisation than anything else, because the complexity of that monitoring and resubmission process is high.