Youre ostensibly out of your pay grade and do not even comprehend the technological issues deeply. If you think youre capable of matching wits with me in terms of consensus systems technology, lets have a test. Start any time you want. Im game.
Life's too short.
You prefer to compare me to bitcoin-dev (aka Core more or less) when Ive been obliterated by Tuberculosis and cysts on my liver and spleen that destroyed my productivity for the past several years, because you see them busy producing code. But that is an ignorant way of forming a comparison. The quality and outcome of the code matters. And comparing a horrifically ill persons productivity to those who are not ill is inane. I will remember your fairness when I come storming back healthy with code that is not incorrect like the shit Core produces. Everything they have proposed is insecure including LN, SegWit, and Side-chains. Theyre are breaking Bitcoin, but they will fail and those who are smart will still have their secure real Bitcoins in the end.
I am being utterly fair. step up or shut up. No one is having a go at you, you deluded psychopath. Jesus chill out. Anyone says anything you bring up your bloody TB.
You have to get rid of the fee. That is what everyone fights over and that is what causes the centralising pressure. Then I think you could have POW mining that didn't centralise. (Of course as IOTA shows that brings up it's own set of interesting challenges)
The sign of a Dunning-Kruger mode is when non-experts hand-wave generalities that arent even technologically correlated as you are doing here.
I bet you someone comes up with a fee-less POW based chain that doesn't centralise the mining. That'll be our little contest.