why are SV supporters always saying that BCH will be proof-of-stake, when noone in the community wants this and never talked about PoS at all? Jimmy is spreading propaganda there.
I think the burden is on you to show how it could. The only correlation between Avalance (a consensus algorithm) and PoS is that a coin that uses Avalnche (Ava Coin) also uses PoS.
I already gave up on that. It is not clear that BCH will even use Avalanche. I'll wait until that happens. Meantime, I am not interested in AVA coin at all.
Then have no concern that an avalanche based preconsensus system on BCH will lead to it becoming PoS, as the fact that AVA coin uses PoS as sybill protection is the connection here.
It essentially helps 0-conf transactions by protecting against double spends, and will likely help block propagation and scaling. I think it also might prevent some other problems.
If a transaction meets Avalanche consensus we can feel safer accepting the transaction knowing there is no double spend, even if it still has zero confirmations on the blockchain.
The BCH devs are looking to see if Avalanche consensus can be used as a preconsensus for transactions. It just manages the mempool for miners to process transactions from.
Not by definition but I suspect it quickly degenerates into PoS. How else can you trust the Avalanche data for anything? Not surprisingly, AVA coin is PoS
You can base the weight of votes on POW. Yes AVA coin is PoS. Whatever this you are saying is speculation. I think Avalanche is awesome but I'll leave if BCH becomes PoS.
I don't think Avalnche becomes any more complicated if it relies on PoW, or PoS. It is it's own consensus form, and is independant of the PoW done by miners.
Besides that. You're just being dishonest. It is NOT just Amaury's pet project, but yea he puts a lot of work into it. That is how it goes. Some talk, some do.
obviously avalanche is a piece in a puzzle; question is: what is the shape of the bigger picture? PoS imo is a good guess when considering amaury's miner distrust & not mining himself
avalanche-idea was supposedly floating around since the fork of BTC, i only first heard about it around JUL2018 (similar timelines with CTOR & merklix). when did you find out about it?
Isn't the point of Butcoin to not have to trust the miners? There doesn't seem to be any reason to believe PoS is coming to BCH. It really seems like the source was simple FUD.
Why do you think Amaury has some kind of issue with miners? Seems you are basing a lot of ideas on this one idea. So far what he is doing for BCH aligns with what you say it should be.
it is not just this one point; the whole nov-fork showed how he is afraid to lose control to miners, is willing to collude with exchanges & do dirty stuff to have his vision come true
Again you have things backward. Amaury didnt do those things, but CSW did. He threatened any exchange or institution doesn't use his software. It likely pushed a lot away from BSV.
Satoshi wrote the checkpoint code many years ago actually. The checkpoint was a response to the threats made by CSW. Had it been a honest hashwar there would have been less need.
A threat from a man that he was capable of committing. The only reason people FUD about the checkpoint is that CSW is mad it was security against an attack he wanted to commit.
more FUD i guess. i've got a feeling that in year we are going hear arguments like - why even have BCH-miners waste electricity, they decide nothing, just roll a dice?
Can anyone sue any entity I the name of another entity they have no claim over? I guess you can hope for a judge who has no understanding of the situation.
1) Hm this is just a guess. I don't think it will end up as you believe but we'll see. One thing I can tell is: IF it goes as you foresee, you will see me on either moving to BSV...
Look man, BCH isn't going PoS, and if it does, I'll jump off that bandwagon and switch to either XMR or BSV if there is good support. But until then, BCH is definitely the best choice.
Ah, that is all wrong. Avalanche can not replace PoW. Avalanche requires PoW still, and is only a preconsensus model that helps onchain scaling, and security against double spends.