I think a lot of you are unstable. But threats are always a clever means of promoting your ideas.
Quite compelling when everything else fails.
Some of us actually care about the security of the network and spend time and effort to protect it from malicious actors
Don't care, irrelevant. Stay on topic. We're still trying to determine how the network decides which nodes have money/"humans" behind them and which do not.
Please explain the mechanism.
ty
You are fixated on the code acting as a form of AI that solely does the voting. The network consists of nodes
with human agents behind them that "vote" with the BTC in their wallet. Actual human being interacting with the code is part of the network!
In other words, they can dump their BTC. That's fine, and for that, non-mining nodes are neither necessary nor instrumental.
I'm not interested in some feelsy newagey humanist take of Bitcoin network. At this point, all I'm interested in how the Bitcoin protocol can differentiate between "real" (money-backed) and "unreal" (unbacked by anything other than crunch power) non-mining nodes.
The answer is "IT FUCKING CAN NOT."
Allow me this argumentum ad verecundiam:
"... They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them.
Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism." --S.N.
P.S. I also don't care if you "care about the security of the network and spend time and effort to protect it from malicious actors."
I care about kittens, which is equally relevant to this topic, which is to say not at all.