The ‘attack’ doesn’t even have to involve hashing. I would bet on constant sewing doubt and meddling in the multi-year transition to PoS. Maybe not in their own name, we have no idea who has the Canaan V10’s, V2200’s or the magic ethash fpgas.
I don’t think speculating on what an attack could look like without even knowing what the target (transition to PoS) looks like is practical.
The threat of fork is no threat at all if you no longer have the miners to protect from rented hash. It’s an empty threat.
Can we get to the bottom of why the people so opposed are so opposed and continue to try to find compromise with that information?
If they are invested in A10’s, Bitmain or Canaan, be honest about it, let’s get them shipping ProgPoW ASICs with the 20% efficiency gain, we have an enormous number of miners that would buy them.
If they have E3’s they’re done anyway, maybe we propose reducing the DAG size and speaking to @OhGodAGirl about the possibility of an E3 firmware update to mine ProgPoW. Bitmain says they’re GPU inside on their statement about the DAG issue.