Pierre explains PARSEC

[tfa]

If I understand correctly there is no chaff. If a value has been voted for by an honest node, then this value is good.

In your case both values are good because they both have been reported by honest nodes. Votes of malicious nodes doesn’t matter here.

[pierrechevalier83]

More exactly, >= 2/3 must be honest (<1/3 may be malicious).

From ABA’s BV broadcast, no estimate coming from <1/3 of the nodes will propagate. From this behaviour follows that they won’t be able to dictate an incorrect value.

[tfa]

I think that the weird things about the diagram I mentioned above are simply due to the block being invalid. A valid block is a block voted for by a supermajority of nodes. Here N=4 and the vote is true for only 2 nodes, which is not enough to make it valid (because 2/3N = 2.66 > 2).

The requirements are not met to trigger a meta election. It is a pity is that this diagram is used in the parsec paper to illustrate meta-election (on page 6):

This is a very bad example because the block is not valid.

When the requirements are met (an event strongly sees a valid block), then current node knows that the block will be agreed on eventually. The meta election only determines the order of the block, so counter intuitive actions can be done like:

• adding an estimate different from what a node voted for in the past
• using randomness by flipping a coin

The aim is only to get a consensus on the order of the block. If it were to determine the block validity, then these actions would be effectively absurd.

I hope this explains my past misunderstandings.

[g.u.y]

@pierrechevalier83

Right now, we’ve got an almost asynchronous concrete coin, as shown in our paper, but we’re still on the lookout for a fully asynchronous concrete coin to make the maths more glamorous. We’ve made progress in that direction last week. Hoping for more this week

@pierrechevalier83 when are you releasing the updated version of the paper which is under peer review currently did you say?

Also: This thread and the thread Understand if-how Parsec solves this problem, please explain/describe Parsec have very similar topics.

[DGeddes]

I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting on a reply from Pierre on that.

[pierrechevalier83]

Understand if-how Parsec solves this problem, please explain/describe Parsec

No update, @Guy. Like you said, the paper is undergoing peer review and it’s available on Arxiv in the meantime: This is not in Maidsafe hands or in my hands right now. It’s in the hands of the journal and the academic reviewers. People at Maidsafe will be notified when there is progress on this, and I’m sure they will bring it up in the forum.

[DGeddes]

The second best looking guy in MaidSafe’s history still on the forums? Outrageous!!!

[dirvine]

so says the third

[DGeddes]

We’re opening this out to the top 50?

[pierrechevalier83]

I have to say, while it’s flattering, it’s tiring to be constantly reduced to one’s looks… Of course, as the third ever best looking employee, you wouldn’t be able to put yourself in my shoes; but you know… It feels a bit objectifying… Sometimes I just want to tell the world: I’m more than just a pretty face

[dirvine]

@pierrechevalier83

Sometimes I just want to tell the world: I’m more than just a pretty face

We all feel the same, solidarity brother