One CPU, One Vote

The proof-of-work also solves the problem of determining representation in majority decision making. If the majority were based on one-IP-address-one-vote, it could be subverted by anyone able to allocate many IPs. Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote.

- Satoshi Nakamoto, Bitcoin Whitepaper

The very nature of proof-of-work is such that it cannot be faked, misrepresented or otherwise falsified. Without a Central Processing Unit (CPU) to cycle through combinations of nonce and block header, a node cannot participate in the block building process. Because proof of work requires the accumulation of infrastructure and the expenditure of energy, there is an inherent need for any node that wishes to participate in the activity of block building to have CPU power available to it in order to continuously process new combinations of block header and nonce to solve proof of work.

A system such as One-IP-address-one-vote or proof of stake can be gamed by accumulation of resources that aren’t representative of an investment in the reliability and security of the network. This discourages investment in network infrastructure as any costs related to the construction of more capable hardware takes away from the node’s accumulated holdings reducing the node’s ability to monetize its position. In this way these methods of achieving consensus can be shown to create instability and reduced levels of investment in the network.

It is only via proof of work that all network participants can be evaluated on an even footing as to their node’s capability and suitability to create blocks and to receive votes from hash generating CPUs. This system incentivises a race to find the most efficient ways of processing block headers and has already led to advances in hardware driving the block difficulty rate up many orders of magnitude since the beginning of the network.