‘Make TON great again’ – Block rate rises 6x, blockchain speed is now 10x

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-04-10Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-04-10

Introduzione

The TON blockchain has increased its speed tenfold and now produces blocks six times faster, resulting in sub-second transaction times. This upgrade, part of the "Make TON Great Again" (MTONGA) framework announced by Telegram founder Pavel Durov, is the first of seven planned steps. The next phase aims to reduce transaction fees by six times. If achieved, lower fees would make TON significantly cheaper than competitors like Solana, potentially positioning it as a more cost-effective option for stablecoin transfers and DeFi applications. Despite currently ranking as the 14th fastest blockchain, TON has experienced a decline in activity since late 2024, with DEX volumes and TVL dropping significantly. However, these trends are partly attributed to broader market conditions. The upgrades are intended to attract new users amid intense competition among Layer 1 blockchains.

The TON blockchain has increased its speed tenfold and now plans to lower fees as top Layer 1 (L1s) compete for users.

On the 9th of April, Telegram founder Pavel Durov announced that the recent upgrade, Catchain 2.0, was successful. According to him, the blockchain now creates blocks six times faster, and transactions are now ‘instant, subsecond.’

Durov added that the 10x faster speed was the first of the seven steps of blockchain’s overhaul plan, dubbed the Make TON Great Again (MTONGA) framework. The second step will cut the transaction cost by 6x.

Will the upgrades improve TON activity?

According to ChainSpect, TON now ranks 14th among the fastest blockchain networks. On the sub-second block times, it only rivals Solana and BNB Chain.

Worth pointing out, BNB Chain also made updates to scale its speed and lower the costs of transactions. The end goal is to attract users seeking faster and cheaper transfers that can also empower other DeFi applications.

This is especially true for stablecoin transfers, which are dominated by Ethereum. However, rising competition from cheaper options like Tron, Solana, BNB Chain, and now TON has slashed its market share in stablecoin settlement.

Currently, TON’s average transfer cost is about $0.00315, while Solana charges $0.00201. In other words, Solana is 40% cheaper than TON.

But if the 6x lower fees are achieved, TON would be 3.5x or 72% cheaper than Solana. That would be a competitive advantage, especially for stablecoin transfers.

As of writing, TON was the 13th largest chain in terms of stablecoin liquidity. Even so, the TON blockchain has seen a broader downtrend in activity since late 2024.

The DEX volumes have dropped from 2024 highs of $1.4B to $26M as of April 2026. Similarly, the TVL (total locked value) has decreased from a record high of $766M to $55M.

But the dropping activity was due to broader market contraction. But it remains to be seen whether the lower fees will attract new users to the chain.

Final Summary

TON is now 10x faster and could soon be 3.5x cheaper than Solana amid cutthroat competition for on-chain users.
Telegram’s Pavel Durov said the plans are part of the Make TON Great Again (MTONGA) framework as chain activity slows.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the name of the upgrade that made TON blockchain 10x faster and who announced it?

AThe upgrade is called Catchain 2.0 and it was announced by Telegram founder Pavel Durov.

QAccording to the article, how much faster is TON at creating blocks and what is the new transaction speed?

ATON now creates blocks six times faster, and transactions are now 'instant, subsecond'.

QWhat is the second step in the 'Make TON Great Again' (MTONGA) framework?

AThe second step is to cut the transaction cost by 6x.

QHow does the article suggest TON's potential future fees would compare to Solana's if the 6x reduction is achieved?

AIf the 6x lower fees are achieved, TON would be 3.5x or 72% cheaper than Solana.

QWhat two key metrics (DEX volumes and TVL) have significantly decreased on TON since late 2024?

ADEX volumes dropped from $1.4B to $26M, and the TVL (total value locked) decreased from $766M to $55M.

Letture associate

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

On the night of February 9th, GitHub suffered a major outage caused by a simple configuration change—reducing a cache refresh interval from 12 to 2 hours—that triggered a cascade of failures. This was not an isolated event, but part of a broader pattern. In early 2026, GitHub experienced at least 8 major incidents, failing to meet its promised 99.9% availability. These outages stemmed from structural issues: explosive growth in load, tight service coupling, and insufficient protection against abnormal traffic. This unprecedented load is driven by AI Agents. In 2025, GitHub handled ~1 billion commits. By 2026, weekly commits reached 275 million, projecting to ~14 billion for the year—a 14x increase. AI tools like Claude Code now contribute 4.5% of all public repository commits, with weekly submissions surging 25x in just three months. AI-generated pull requests jumped from 4 million to 17 million per month in half a year. Unlike human developers, AI Agents work continuously, generating commits at a scale that overwhelms infrastructure designed for human rhythms. The surge also shattered GitHub's business model. Copilot's flat-rate pricing, based on assisting human developers, became unsustainable as Agentic AI sessions consumed resources worth hundreds of dollars for a few dollars in fees. In response, GitHub imposed usage limits and, by June 1st, shifted to a pay-per-use "AI Credits" system. Facing this new reality, GitHub realized a 10x scaling plan was insufficient. It announced a need to *redesign* its architecture for 30x current scale—decoupling services, adding fault isolation, and improving change management to prevent cascading failures. Other platforms like Stripe and AWS are facing similar challenges with AI Agents. Fundamentally, GitHub is transitioning from a human collaboration platform to an "exhaust pipe" for automated AI workflows. Its detailed post-mortem reports aim to maintain trust during this turbulent rebuild. The February outage was not just a technical glitch, but a signal of the software industry's entry into a new, AI-driven era.

marsbit8 min fa

marsbit8 min fa

Visualizing Musk's Wealth: $3.6 Million Per Hour, Average Person Needs 11 Million Years of Work

Elon Musk is on the verge of becoming the world's first trillionaire, with a current estimated net worth of $970 billion. This wealth, largely tied to equity in SpaceX and Tesla, translates to him accumulating roughly $992 per second or $3.6 million per hour on average over his 31-year career. His fortune surpasses the annual GDP of over 125 countries and represents about 3% of U.S. GDP, double the relative wealth of historical figures like John D. Rockefeller. For perspective, an average U.S. household earning the median income would need to work over 11 million years to amass a comparable sum. Musk's wealth could buy approximately 2.4 million average American homes, all 32 NFL teams plus every NBA team, or over 10,000 private jets with operating costs. The analysis highlights the staggering scale and concentration of modern wealth, driven by successes in electric vehicles, space exploration, and artificial intelligence.

marsbit11 min fa

Visualizing Musk's Wealth: $3.6 Million Per Hour, Average Person Needs 11 Million Years of Work

marsbit11 min fa

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

Facing massive paper losses exceeding $90 billion each amidst a sharp market downturn, "Digital Asset Treasury" (DAT) giants Strategy and Bitmine find themselves in a precarious position, but with different underlying risks. Strategy, heavily invested in Bitcoin (BTC), faces significant financial strain. Its strategy relies heavily on debt, including convertible notes and preferred stock (STRC) requiring substantial dividend payments. With its cash reserves dwindling and BTC offering no staking yield for cash flow, Strategy's high leverage makes it vulnerable. A continued price decline could force asset sales to meet obligations, potentially creating a negative feedback loop. Its market value has already fallen sharply. In contrast, Bitmine, an Ethereum (ETH) holder, appears on firmer financial ground. It primarily funds its purchases through equity offerings (like ATM programs), avoiding debt pressure. It also generates income by staking a large portion of its ETH holdings. While not immune to market drops and shareholder dilution concerns, Bitmine maintains more flexibility, recently announcing a new preferred share offering to raise further capital. The core divergence lies in their financing: Bitmine uses equity (investor money), while Strategy uses debt (borrowed money). Consequently, Bitmine currently faces less immediate liquidity pressure than Strategy, which must navigate the dual challenge of servicing debt/dividends and a declining core asset (BTC) price.

marsbit15 min fa

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

marsbit15 min fa

Both Suffer Losses Exceeding $9 Billion, Which Is More at Risk: Strategy or Bitmine?

As Bitcoin and Ethereum prices drop significantly, two major corporate treasury holders, Strategy and Bitmine, are facing massive unrealized losses—approximately $100 billion and $90 billion, respectively. The article compares their financial health and underlying risks. Bitmine, holding over 5.4 million ETH, relies primarily on equity financing (like ATM offerings) and has substantial cash reserves, alongside staking income from its ETH holdings. It plans a $300 million perpetual preferred stock offering. In contrast, Strategy, holding Bitcoin, is burdened by significant convertible debt and preferred stock dividends, with cash reserves covering only about six months of its annual dividend obligations. Strategy's leverage is higher, and it faces potential liquidity pressure if BTC prices fall further, possibly forcing asset sales. While both companies are under pressure, Bitmine’s financial structure appears more resilient, whereas Strategy’s high leverage makes it more vulnerable to continued market declines.

Odaily星球日报20 min fa

Both Suffer Losses Exceeding $9 Billion, Which Is More at Risk: Strategy or Bitmine?

Odaily星球日报20 min fa

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

AI Bubble: Where It Really Is and Who's Swimming Naked This analysis dissects the AI industry not as a single entity but as a five-layer pyramid, arguing that bubbles are concentrated in specific tiers, not uniformly distributed. **Key Distinction from the 2000 Dot-com Bubble:** Unlike 2000, where companies had stock prices before revenue, today's leading AI players have massive, contract-backed revenue driving their valuations. Core infrastructure demand is real, with every GPU running at full capacity for paying customers. **The Five-Layer Pyramid & Bubble Assessment:** * **L0 (Fab/Manufacturing) & Top L4 (Leading AI Apps): NO BUBBLE.** Companies like TSMC, NVIDIA, major cloud providers (Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon), and top AI labs have real revenues and orders. Supply is tightly constrained by TSMC's disciplined capacity control and physical limits like power/land for data centers, preventing a supply glut. * **L1 (Memory): BATTLEGROUND.** Sky-high HBM margins could signal a new structural cycle or a classic "boom before bust." The oligopoly of three major players may enforce supply discipline, making this a high-stakes bet. * **L2 (Interconnect/Optical Modules): BUBBLE TERRITORY.** Companies like Lumentum and AAOI have seen stock surges (4-10x) far outpacing revenue growth. This hardware segment has lower physical barriers to expansion than fabs, allowing speculation. It mirrors the 2000 bubble's epicenter—optics. * **L3 (Infrastructure/"GPU Landlords"): VULNERABLE.** GPU leasing companies profit from the current compute shortage but own no long-term moat. Their business model relies on a temporary bottleneck that will ease as big tech expands and new tech (e.g., potential space-based data centers) emerges. * **L4 Long Tail (VC-backed Startups): STRONG BUBBLE SIGNALS.** VC funding concentration in AI is twice that of the 1999 peak. Many startups with little revenue use the valuation logic of successful giants to justify their own, creating high risk of a "valuation crunch" when funding dries up. **Critical Risks to Monitor:** 1. **GPU Depreciation & Accounting:** Companies extending the assumed useful life of GPUs artificially boost profits. The true economic life depends on future generational leaps from NVIDIA. 2. **"GPU Credit" & Off-Balance-Sheet Leverage:** Emerging structures where shell companies borrow to buy GPUs and lease them out (with chipmakers sometimes investing) move debt off major balance sheets. This echoes the "vendor financing" of 2000 and the securitization risks of 2008, though currently small-scale. 3. **TSMC Abandoning Caution:** If the primary supply bottleneck (TSMC's conservative capacity planning) breaks, runaway supply could trigger a bust. 4. **Algorithmic Efficiency Breakthrough:** A major leap in software efficiency could drastically reduce the need for raw compute hardware, undermining the investment thesis. **Conclusion:** The AI boom is expensive and has frothy areas, but its core is underpinned by real demand and physical supply constraints. The bubble risk is layered: most present in optical components, GPU leasing, and the long-tail startup ecosystem, while the foundational chip manufacturing and leading application layers remain relatively solid—for now.

marsbit28 min fa

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

marsbit28 min fa

Trading

Spot

Futures

Articoli Popolari

Come comprare TON

Benvenuto in HTX.com! Abbiamo reso l'acquisto di The Open Network (TON) semplice e conveniente. Segui la nostra guida passo passo per intraprendere il tuo viaggio nel mondo delle criptovalute.Step 1: Crea il tuo Account HTXUsa la tua email o numero di telefono per registrarti il tuo account gratuito su HTX. Vivi un'esperienza facile e sblocca tutte le funzionalità,Crea il mio accountStep 2: Vai in Acquista crypto e seleziona il tuo metodo di pagamentoCarta di credito/debito: utilizza la tua Visa o Mastercard per acquistare immediatamente The Open NetworkTON.Bilancio: Usa i fondi dal bilancio del tuo account HTX per fare trading senza problemi.Terze parti: abbiamo aggiunto metodi di pagamento molto utilizzati come Google Pay e Apple Pay per maggiore comodità.P2P: Fai trading direttamente con altri utenti HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): Offriamo servizi su misura e tassi di cambio competitivi per i trader.Step 3: Conserva The Open Network (TON)Dopo aver acquistato The Open Network (TON), conserva nel tuo account HTX. In alternativa, puoi inviare tramite trasferimento blockchain o scambiare per altre criptovalute.Step 4: Scambia The Open Network (TON)Scambia facilmente The Open Network (TON) nel mercato spot di HTX. Accedi al tuo account, seleziona la tua coppia di trading, esegui le tue operazioni e monitora in tempo reale. Offriamo un'esperienza user-friendly sia per chi ha appena iniziato che per i trader più esperti.

1.7k Totale visualizzazioniPubblicato il 2024.12.10Aggiornato il 2026.06.02

Discussioni

Benvenuto nella Community HTX. Qui puoi rimanere informato sugli ultimi sviluppi della piattaforma e accedere ad approfondimenti esperti sul mercato. Le opinioni degli utenti sul prezzo di TON TON sono presentate come di seguito.