> I would argue that the hash rate follows value, rather than the other way round. I do actually say that in the article, in almost those same words. My (perh

> I would argue that the hash rate follows value, rather than the other way round. I do actually say that in the article, in almost those same words. My (perhaps not very well articulated) point was that regardless of what follows what, the hash rate, or the amount of work, in terms of energy expended is by far greatest of all other crypto coins, especially considering the whole blockchain going back to beginning, which means to 51% attack Bitcoin is harder than anything else right now. For this reason, if I wanted to park my money in a crypto currency, I'd probably choose Bitcoin as the safest, hardest reinforced as far as proof-of-work goes. Of course there are other factors at play here, but it seems like amount of proof-of-work, or the difficulty, is an important factor in a crypto currency preciousness.