In case you missed it, this report by Shai Deshe confirmed that Qubic had around 35% of the Monero hashrate.
They did not get more than 50% of the hashrate.

The important point is not that they didn’t get 51%. The important point is that Monero is supposed to be alphabet-hammer resistant but this experience has exposed glaring vulnerabilities in those aspects.

I personally disagree with Shai’s views in the Interpretation and Conclusion section. There, he advocates for ASIC friendlyness as a countermeasure. His view is, for a given algorithm, ASIC hardware is very limited in quantity, and it would be way too expensive and impractical to buy new hardware to make an attack on the network. In his view, with ASIC resistance, it’s very easy for bad actors to get hashrate for an attack.

I don’t agree because as Shai pointed out, Qubic brought new hardware from new hardware, but that was a bit above 5% (under some assumptions). Most of their hashrate came from bribing existing miners into switching to a more lucrative pool. Given that, ASIC friendliness does not help if your miners switch allegiance for more coins in their pockets. And the community will not be able to crowd-fund their way into fighting back. In case the attacker faces a true believer mining pool ready to loose money by not joining the attackers, the attackers can always consider getting a wrench and applying some physical pressure to the pool operators so that they switch. Remember, the pool of hardware is limited, controlling that hardware is controlling the network and in this case, no community funded outside help is coming…