Quote from: dinofelis on March 21, 2017, 04:29:00 PM

Quote from: franky1 on March 21, 2017, 04:20:59 PM

dymanics has the hard consensus of nodes and pools. which means NODES can vote against pools.

Here you go again. If pools want A, and they have a serious $$$ stake in A, and the currently active nodes want B, what stops pools to fire up 3 times more nodes voting A for a tiny fraction of $$$ ?

because that centralised mindset is just handing a hotpotato around nodes itself own...

not the nodes of merchants who have orphaned that block.
not the nodes of users who have orphaned that block.

pools can sybil themselves all they like.. end result is they are just playing with themselves in their own room.. while the rest of the network are getting good blocks from the other 19 pools that are following rules acceptable to the community.

Quote from: dinofelis on March 21, 2017, 04:29:00 PM

Did you still not understand that proof of work was invented to avoid vote by node, because the above Sybil attack is far too easy ?

bitcoin doesnt just have one layer of protection. it has atleast 10.
nodes, coin holders that dont run nodes, and pools.. work in unison of consensus (symbiotic relationship of consent) to agree on a set of rules.
EG a low node count cannot change what pools accept
EG a low pool count cannot change what node accept
a low node or low pool count cannot change what coin holders accept

real consensus is about majority of the community

your thinking too 2 dimensionally about 1 security feature and expressing its flaw.
but your not seeing the bigger 3 dimensional overview of the other security features

Quote from: dinofelis on March 21, 2017, 04:29:00 PM

And don't confuse users (people exchanging coins for value in the market) with nodes again...

P.S stop thinking that nodes are not users. because your missing the big picture