Satoshi's PoW does not distinguish between faulty and non-faulty nodes.
In bitcoin, faulty nodes = sybil nodes.
A byzantine fault in bitcoin is a fork.So we can conclude Bitcoin didn't solve BGP because there is no block chain objectivity about faults. And then we can say that Sybil attacks on pools destroy one of our subjective metrics for community appraisal of Consistency.
A poor conclusion. LCR provides the objectivity; branches which get orphaned were objectively selected against as being byzantine faulty.
So if the LCR is creating censored transactions is that not a fault/failure? What the hell use of Byzantine fault tolerance if it doesn't guarantee a system that can be used by the participants?
The following practical, concise definitions are helpful in understanding Byzantine fault tolerance:[3][4]
Byzantine fault
Any fault presenting different symptoms to different observers
Byzantine failure
The loss of a system service due to a Byzantine fault in systems that require consensus
Loss of Access is a failure. CAP theorem applies.