"...if every bank vault in the world had a vulnerability that you (and only you) could exploit, possibly without detection (or at least with a degree of deniability)... what would you do?"
I think this completely ignores the fact that messing with the block chain would seriously screw over all the miners that are choosing this network for monetary reasons. Your analogy is flawed. Basically, it's more like "if every bank vault in the world had a vulnerability that you (and only you) could exploit, and you spent tons of money to get that vulnerability, and exploiting it would make all your money worthless, what would you do?" That's more like the actual situation here.
... except we should remember the fact that exploiting this power is not an all-or-nothing choice. Some have shown that double spends and other abuses of this kind of power have already happened, yet Bitcoin survives. As long as someone can exploit this in small ways and get away with it (without causing total collapse), they will have an incentive to continue. And the short-term gains (converted to value that doesn't depend on Bitcoin's future) for that person/entity may be much more attractive than the threat of eventual collapse when their little game is up (and the masses start jumping the Bitcoin ship).
Also, the pool operators (who have the ability to exploit this power) have not really spent large sums of money themselves. They have power because ignorant minors are essentially handing over their vote to the pool operators in exchange for convenience and low variance.
Comments
"...if every bank vault in the world had a vulnerability that you (and only you) could exploit, possibly without detection (or at least with a degree of deniability)... what would you do?"
I think this completely ignores the fact that messing with the block chain would seriously screw over all the miners that are choosing this network for monetary reasons. Your analogy is flawed. Basically, it's more like "if every bank vault in the world had a vulnerability that you (and only you) could exploit, and you spent tons of money to get that vulnerability, and exploiting it would make all your money worthless, what would you do?" That's more like the actual situation here.
... except we should remember the fact that exploiting this power is not an all-or-nothing choice. Some have shown that double spends and other abuses of this kind of power have already happened, yet Bitcoin survives. As long as someone can exploit this in small ways and get away with it (without causing total collapse), they will have an incentive to continue. And the short-term gains (converted to value that doesn't depend on Bitcoin's future) for that person/entity may be much more attractive than the threat of eventual collapse when their little game is up (and the masses start jumping the Bitcoin ship).
Also, the pool operators (who have the ability to exploit this power) have not really spent large sums of money themselves. They have power because ignorant minors are essentially handing over their vote to the pool operators in exchange for convenience and low variance.