You can start mining a worthless alt with a new algo. Have fun.
This is no different than a typical business/labor dispute, the sort that happens when bosses make promises they don't keep.
Really.
And the slimmer the miner's (it's, like, 9 pool operators, who are we kidding?) current margin is, the more incentive they have to "Unionize" and "strike."
Only when IRL workers strike, they don't get to draw 96% of their paycheck, as the miners will (because block reward).
Step1: Grind BTC to a complete stop
Step2: ??
Step3: Profit
Think there's a flaw in your logic somewhere
How do you think strikes work?
Step1: Grind BTC to a complete stop
Step2: "Your coin isn't worth dick until you let us have what we want. While we're on strike, we're making only 4% less than when we're working for you. Think about it. Take your time."
Step3: Profit
You're delusional or trolling if you think this will work.
Let's try to be civil. I'm not gonna call you a faggot and you're not going to call me delusional or a troll. Shall we give that a try and see how it goes?
There's a pretty huge gap between calling someone "delusional or trolling" and a faggot.
We live in different worlds.
But back on topic: tell me how a mining equivalent of a walkout would hurt them?
Or do you think workers who strike never get what they want?
For one, BTC is still an experiment, mining has been getting more and more competitive, profit margins are getting thinner. Miners are heavily invested in BTC and their survival depends on the BTC price, to a point where if BTC goes down say 10% they may never see a return on their investment. We've already seen few mining operators closing their doors because of thin margins. Now, one of the worst things for any market is uncertainty. So since their survival depends on BTC price, contributing any uncertainty to the market would be suicidal for them. They're well aware of this this is exactly why they're staying quiet and trying not to breath to hard for a fear of effecting anything.
Another aspect of this, is the main reason why we (small blockers?) are against bigger blocks. We feel that centralization is bitcoin's Achilles' Heel and is the #1 cause what might bring BTC down. As such it must be protected at all costs. Right now what is/(should) keep a bunch of devs awake at night is the centralization of miners in China. (Who would've thought that bitcoiners are a paranoid bunch?). Thus any proposed change must above all answer whether it helps security/(decentralization), if not it goes on a risk/benefit analysis and again being a paranoid bunch we tend to err on a side of caution. I don't believe i heard a single serious argument how bigger blocks help decentralization, best case you get is that the benefit outweighs the increase of centralization.
With that said, now imagine what would happen to the price when a group that we foresee as the biggest threat to BTC comes out and tries to force a hostile fork that would cause further centralization around them?? I for one say they can keep their inefficient paypal tokens and stick to less centralized chain or switch to alt.
tl;dr decentralization is THE REASON why people trust $10B in BTC. Best case for an entity that tries a hostile fork that gives them more centralization might end up being their worst case as they end up with a bunch of worthless ledger entries.