Create account

replied 2630d
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.
replied 2630d
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
replied 2630d
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?
replied 2630d
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
replied 2630d
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?