Apparently PoW should still be in there. Something was "missing in translation" here...
https://medium.com/@chrispacia/avalanche-pre-consensus-making-zeroconf-secure-ddedec254339
I think they're 2 different things though, Emin is building a new coin from the ground up just using Avalanche, Chris is using avalanche for preconsensus on bch
I just saw your video interviewing Chris Pacia.
Now I get it. Thank you!
For BCH, it is an add-on pre-consensus method on top of existing PoW algorithm.
AVA instead uses it as a consensus method, as opposed to Nakamoto's, coupled with PoS algorithm.
I believe Pacia and some other devs were talking about basing Avalanche participant selection on PoW over the past ~100 blocks so it's still critical for gaining control of the network
Yes and no. Basically the old benefit of 51% is "few confirmations" accommodating a split for a double-spend. With Avalanche, network control can cause a sway. But remains _not_ split.
I understand that, I'm saying they were proposing using PoW over the last 100 blocks as a selection mechanism for Avalanche instead of PoS
Apologies, I seemed to have missed your point.
So what are you implying with "it's still critical for gaining control of the network" before?
Just that centralization or any kind of attack would still rely upon gaining a large majority of hashrate on the network. Lots of people were irked by the idea of PoS Bitcoin
Now there's an alternative: adjust to zero-conf PoW, or adopt PoS rejuvenated/perfected with Avalanche.
The issue with PoS was when it is coupled with Nakamoto consensus, isn't it?
I guess I should also check check out the video of Emir in Ava, because truth be told I haven't gone through that one.
Yeah after I saw the second video I started figuring that out. Definitely skeptical about an avalanche only coin, but interesting to investigate it.
Yeah I'm not sure either, but I'm curious to ask him some more questions and looking forward to seeing it launch
