in order to survive being minor hostile, the difficulty adjustment has to be completely changed. and i iterated through dozens of options, multi-interval block versions, the use of a verifiable delay function to stop hostile sidechain censorship attacks, the difficulty adjustment parameters and algorithm had to be adjusted, simulated. i eventually came up with a scheme where the chain switches its anchoring to block height and instead bytes and time become the cadence rule. early blocks must be smaller, and get smaller rewards, exactly proportional. later blocks get to have a higher size limit, and the reward is based on the limit - in the rare case a block doesn't use all of its allowed limit. activations are triggered on median time past instead of block height. so, yeah, that's a no. and it uses sha256 *specifically* to both dare the big miners to try and attack it, as well as a lure that pulls them away from mining bitcoin core spamchain bitcohen. why does this matter? because the ultra simple difficulty adjustment is WHY bip-110 could not succeed without the miners consent. it's WHY you can't "fire the miners". it is specifically a goal of my design to, should the exchange value become NGU, to steal miners from bitcoin and crash their shit. so, you can't change the hash function if you want to spit in their face as well as step outside the walls of their fortress. you have to change everything else that defines valid blocks.