Quote from: gambleroflife on Today at 07:10:16 AM

Thanks for replies. I get it. However after miners and nodes becoming separete entities, nodes can reject on if the older blocks are changed or manipulated somehow. So hashrate and nodes consensus are different.

They could, but usually won't. A normal node simply follows whichever valid chain has the most invested PoW. A valid chain being one that follows the protocol's set of rules such as blocksize, outputs not exceeding inputs etc. External information such as how much hashpower each miner has is not accounted for because it isn't available to the nodes.

Quote from: gambleroflife on Today at 07:10:16 AM

Like bitcoin cash fork. Economicly worthy nodes rejected higher hashrate and bitcoin remained bitcoin.

That's not at all what happened and wouldn't even have been possible. Bitcoin nodes rejected Bitcoin Cash blocks because they where invalid from their perspective, on account of exceding the blocksize limit. Hashrate played no role in the validity of each block. The hashrate then followed the market, and the market decided to hold Bitcoin rather than Bitcoin Cash.