Nodes don't control the outcome, only hashrate does. Well actually the economic majority does. And the sufficiently organized whales are superior when it comes to a hashrate war (this was explained in great detail in the discussion between @dinofelis and myself in the other thread).
The nodes that refuse to mine on the longest-chain will waste their hashrate and bankrupt themselves.
The nodes that refuse to mine on the longest-chain will waste their hashrate and bankrupt themselves.
What if BTC with PoW changed has the larger network, the Bitcoin devs, the larger transaction rate, and the larger market cap ?
Read this post and then this page of the thread. I hope you can assimilate all that without me having to write a single post which tries to glue all that together for the reader.
If sufficiently organized, nothing can defeat the control of the whales (other than a larger economic whale such as the Chinese government).
Longest chain has nothing to do with anything in 2017, Bitcoin moved away from longest-chain = valid-chain a long time ago anyway, and given what I've described, even the chain with the most cumulative PoW won't matter.
Bwrahahaha.
Without a longest-chain rule then consensus is impossible and double-spends are trivial. Dude you've entirely forgotten or never learned Bitcoin 101.
Now, stop wasting everyone's time, you've already been told
Talking about Bitcoin doesn't make you important. Especially when you're incompetent.
I wasn't disrespectful to you, nor even frank about your technological incompetence until you started this authoritarian condescending ad hominem. You started this unnecessary and useless acrimony. You don't have any control over my competency and therefor my importance. Democracy and politics is dead or dying. Meritocracy is what wins now.