Avalanche as a way to improve AE


#1

After collaboration with Emin Gun Sirer, I think you know about Avalanche (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXrrqtFlGow). What’s your opinion? Do you think it’s plausible way to improve AE in the future, let’s say 2+ years horizont? Is it even worth the effort? Thank’s for every opinion!

Regards

Martin


#2

Hey @Martin,

Our devs will get back to you on that.

Regards,
The AE Team


#3

Martin, I’ve watched the video and read parts of the White Paper.

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmUy4jh5mGNZvLkjies1RWM4YuvJh5o2FYopNPVYwrRVGV

“June 2017” - Reads the first slide at the beginning of the video. So I’m a little bit lost. Can someone verify if it was truly 2017 or 2018?

Also, argument with us, why would it be more valuable? Thanks, Julio from AE.


#4

Hi Julio,
First I was thinking about this photo of Europe (28.6.2018 and 25.7.2018) and I am wondering: Do we need even more hot air from mining?
Europa-Pocasie-ESA-Sucho-Animacia%20(1)
Europa-Pocasie-ESA-Sucho-Animacia

Less emotional
1.) It’s green ,no minig, no unnecessary wasting of energy and potentially less transaction fees(if any) and
2.) If you want to double spend, system is not guaranteed to reach consensus: badness on cheaters shoulders!
3.) System can reach consensus even in 50% byzantine actors environment
4.) TPS 1000 -10000
4.) Can potentially handle millions of nodes
5.) Probability of not reaching the consensus when it should is lower than that of CPU miscomputations

Disadvantage: No real world deployment, only tests were done

Second: I was thinking about how it could work with AE state channels! Great combo?!


#5

I watched the video throughly:

  • On paper; sounds marvellous.
  • Lack of testing, as with most consensus algorithms, will lead to unexpected problems.
  • ^ will determine if POW; BtC NG remain as gold standard. Or if these new branch will build a new market for upcoming platform/protocols within the next 2 to 5 years.

Regardless of the outcome; I’d focus on understanding POW and “legacy”, ancient, old, and tested consensus mechanisms first. Otherwise, I’d be unable, ignorant, in judging state of the art.


#6

Hey,

Avalanche looks certainly interesting but you seem to have a minor misconception. Avalanche is a consensus algorithm while PoW and PoS are strategies for leader election, which is just one stage of a consensus algorithm. Avalanche itself still needs a leader election mechanism, which could be either based on PoW or PoS—or others.

Now for your initial question: I’m very happy to explore consensus algorithms that go beyond the simple longest/heaviest chain rule and we will most certainly investigate how feasible they are. If Avalanche turns out to be as good as the paper states, then it would definitely be worth the effort.


#7

Hi Sascha,

Thank you for clearing some things up. Do you think that POS + Avalanche have some major disadvantages over POW + Avalanche? Maybe also question for future investigation.

Regards

Martin