I've had this argument a zillion times. It is boring already. I don't feel like repeating myself on the details on how the mass switch you expect can't change the outcome. Go on in your delusion about the lack of effects from centralization. When you wake up one day with government regulation of 51% of the pools and owners of ASICs and your coins are blacklisted, don't come whining to me.
I'll offer you two sentences.
If necessary SWAT teams show up at physical locations where the bulk of the ASICs are since for example one miner has 10% of network hash rate all in one location in East Washington. But most non-personal miners wouldn't need to physically persuaded, a regulation is all that is needed to compel them to comply.
A cpu-only coin won't have this problem. The government can't regulate millions of individual miners. Whereas, Bitcoin is fucked.
You are hilarious. When we were talking about co-opting bitcoin, I was hopelessly naive for thinking the government can't pull it off. But if we use a CPU-only coin, then the government is suddenly hapless and helpless? That is a hoot.
Intel and AMD are both in the US. The government is already known to slap secret court orders on companies just like them to keep their mouths shut. You are the one who's hopelessly naive if you think that buying CPUs is harder for them than making a huge spectacle of raiding miners' datacenters.
Besides, a CPU-only coin is a figment of your imagination, there's no such thing. All known hashing algorithms can be sped up with specialized hardware, and there's little reason to think this doesn't apply to all algorithms in general.
There is no solution to this kind of POW attack. Bitcoin is about as good as it gets. If you want to defend against 51% you need some other mechanism like proof of stake.