Did you even read my article? TL;DR in case if you didn't BIP110 will create a permanent fork that is incompatible with bitcoin, and BIP110 will suffer weaknesses and vulnerabilities by default unless it gets a PoW change, in either case it will be a failed chain or an altcoin that isn't bitcoin. The focus of my case against BIP110 is the implementation. In Bitcoin, it is a system of proof-of-work, if one lacks hashrate support, it forks off into its own coin that isn't bitcoin. If BIP110 should be implemented, it needs hashrate support. If you don't like that, then you are welcome to create your own coin that uses proof-of-stake or proof-of-nodes (both of which can be sybil attacked) instead of proof-of-work.
Did you even read my article?
TL;DR in case if you didn't
BIP110 will create a permanent fork that is incompatible with bitcoin, and BIP110 will suffer weaknesses and vulnerabilities by default unless it gets a PoW change, in either case it will be a failed chain or an altcoin that isn't bitcoin. The focus of my case against BIP110 is the implementation. In Bitcoin, it is a system of proof-of-work, if one lacks hashrate support, it forks off into its own coin that isn't bitcoin. If BIP110 should be implemented, it needs hashrate support. If you don't like that, then you are welcome to create your own coin that uses proof-of-stake or proof-of-nodes (both of which can be sybil attacked) instead of proof-of-work.