Oddbean

true, but actively fighting against massive farms with thousands of GPU's and ASIC's, and putting CPU miners in front allows for more decentralization as smaller miners now also have a chance of giving back to the network. pools are great for giving smaller miners a chance,, but they are a possible attack vector because of centralization (p2pool excluded, as it is peer to peer) on the other side, this is easy mining botnets too (especially IoT botnets).

The thing is that asics also are alot more efficient than cpus's. for each asic device you would need around thousand cpu's to equal its hashing power. I do agree with you on that the regular bitcoin users should also have possibility to mine, using heaters that hash etc.

yup, and a simple SHA256 ASIC is so cheap and easy to make. RandomX is really hard to implement on hardware, so creating an ASIC for it is gonna be really expensive. CPU's profit from it because it's specifically made for CPU, and the memory hard operations make mining on GPU's the same as/slower then CPU mining.

But It is also a factor of coin distribution. If we have to choose, who would deserve a new issuance of coins in reward for securing the network? pure luck (random) hardest work (pow) central issuer (fiat) orrrr... The biggest stake holder (eth)

And if ₿itcoin was really using this randomx algorithm, it wouldn't even matter, the mining factories would just switch to that protocol and massbuy cpu's. And who says if supercomputers aren't fit for this task asswell? With no way to outperform super computers, the mining process would lie in the hands of nations again and pucked. The only difference is that the mining process is also in the hands of the consumers: if that is the only difference and goal, we should rather make those Asic's easy to use for every person to achieve that goal then switching from hashing algorithm. You achieve the same results eventually.