They failed to destroy Bitcoin because it is not only about buying mining hardware, just like wining a war is not just about buying weapons.
There is a shit loads of logistics involved with using these weapons while there is a lot of human factor involved and the situation on the battle field is changing constantly.
They don't have an organisation in place that could handle manufacturing and deploying mining equipment quickly enough and then maintaining it (undisturbed) for long enough. And they have too much corruption inside.
The only way it can work now is because it is distributed and each mining operation is independent.
Some of them are actually secret.
For the big organisations that would want to get rid of bitcoin, it is much easier to corrupt people and conduct propaganda campaigns in the media.
And that's what they do.
Mining is the most important (and the most resilient) point of resistance of Bitcoin, against the governments and the financial oligarchy.
+1
Good to see some military metaphors used to describe the situation, and exactly on point!
It's naive to assume that state actors are not involved in bitcoin in a major way. Personally I believe the Chinese govt. is subsidizing the miners, possibly even precisely to prevent a 51% percent attack from US banks? Makes sense to me. As far as US government involvement, normally that would be done via US multinational corporations and Wall Street financiers, who are in fact "hiding in plain sight" in bitcoin. Wall Street wants to control bitcoin for their own profit, but will do the bidding of the Fed when the phone call comes in. A Faustian bargain? There could well be financial execs "committing suicide" in their cars again... It will get more interesting in the next few years...
Just because there are armed guards in front of the bank it doesn't mean those armed guards make executive decisions for the bank.
They are just hired muscle and may be fired if they forget their place and get uppity.
Looks like iceTARD has finally seen the light - you're right,
Core could get fired if they get too uppity. UASF could be the straw that broke the camel's back...
Final note - this thread is almost devoid of technical debate on the UASF proposal. Is it safe to say that technically it's complete crap?