That's why we propose not UASF only but UASF + PoW change, what did you think... Current situation with the miners is problematic. Their power levels need to be re-adjusted.
I actually would propose a fork with PoS for the consensus, while keeping PoW for the coin creation. The PoS would not be remunerated, it would just be a "free service to the community" in the same way that people are now running (powerless) full nodes.
But let us stick to your idea to change the PoW scheme. For instance, scrypt instead of sha-256. This has many facets to it.
First, I'm always puzzled why bitcoiners want to have something in bitcoin, that is already up and running elsewhere: if you change PoW into scrypt, you have Litecoin. Litecoin is essentially bitcoin, but with PoW being scrypt. Litecoin was invented, exactly, because already in 2011, people understood that asic owners were the deciders of the coin - it failed however, because there are also scrypt asics. Note that DASH invented X11, a joyful mix of 11 different hash algorithms, "to resist ASICS". Useless:
https://asicminermarket.com/product-tag/x11/For the moment, cryptonight is still standing. But with monero's increasing price, I wonder whether it will stand a long time.
There are serious efforts to make essentially ASIC resistant algorithms, and I think that burstcoin is using a so big memory needing PoW algorithm that you need disk space of TB for it ; it becomes "proof of capacity". If I were a hard disk vendor, I would hype such coins.
But what I want to say, why stick with bitcoin if you want to use the system of another coin.
Simply sell your bitcoin and buy the other coin !But let us consider that, nevertheless,
you try to change the PoW function in bitcoin. Let us say for the moment that we take scrypt. So the new bitcoin is simply a version of litecoin, but with a different initial chain. What happens ? This is in fact a totally new coin you create, with not even the option for the actual miners to "switch camp".
So "old bitcoin" will simply continue to function, with all its stuff. The only thing you did, was create a totally new coin, that happens to have the same coin possession as the bitcoin owners at the point of forking. But it is, say, litecoin, but with the former balances of bitcoin.
People will now own two coins: the new alt coin you just made, and their original bitcoins of course. In order for the new coin to take all the value of the old bitcoin, people need to sell all their old (original) bitcoins, and buy more of the new lite-bitcoin.
What makes you think that people are going to dump their *original bitcoins* to buy the new altcoin, and they didn't do that with the existing litecoin ?After all, you have to sell your *original bitcoins* to buy more of a new coin that is in all respects like Litecoin.
Note that deciding on which coin to sell, the "new free money you got" (the lite-bitcoin) or your "original bitcoins", you have to be careful. If you make a mistake, you lose everything ! It is not a matter of *your own choice* but it is a matter of your own prediction of what others will do, while others will try to make you dump your "valuable" coin, and buy the shit coin instead. Which one will it be ?
