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

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-04-10Last updated on 2026-04-10

Abstract

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.

Ethena price prediction: Will the $0.08 zone keep ENA’s recovery alive?

The Ethena (ENA) price has risen 14.11% from its July 8 low, recovering the $0.08 resistance zone to trade at $0.082. Despite this recent gain, the overall trend remains bearish, with the token down 94% from its all-time high. Positive developments include the launch of the Robinhood Earn feature, where ENA represented over 70% of user asset allocations, significantly boosting the Robinhood Chain's TVL. However, a large transfer of 1.231 billion ENA ($94 million) between unknown wallets created mixed signals. Technical analysis shows long-term bearish dominance, with price action below key former support. The ongoing bounce from $0.08 requires sustained buying pressure to continue. Key resistance is seen at the $0.105-$0.125 zone. Analysts suggest a potential bounce to that zone could present a selling opportunity, while current price levels offer unclear risk-reward for swing traders. The $0.08 level is crucial for keeping the recovery alive.

ambcrypto3m ago

Ethena price prediction: Will the $0.08 zone keep ENA’s recovery alive?

ambcrypto3m ago

Claude Accused of Becoming Dumber by the Entire Internet, Anthropic Steps In to Reveal: It’s Not the Model That’s Tricking You

When users complained that Claude was "getting dumber," the root cause wasn't the AI model itself. In an official blog post, Anthropic clarified the critical difference between two key settings in Claude Code: Model and Effort. Model refers to the core "brain"—the fixed, trained weights of a specific AI (like Sonnet, Opus, or Fable). Changing the Model addresses *capability* ("can it do this?"), but its knowledge is static post-training. Effort, however, controls the AI's *approach and thoroughness* for a specific task. A higher Effort level instructs Claude to read more files, run tests, perform verification, and complete multi-step reasoning before responding, significantly increasing its "work output" for that job. Conversely, low Effort leads to quicker, less thorough replies. This distinction explains the March 2024 uproar where users experienced a sudden drop in Claude's performance. The cause was not a model change but Anthropic quietly lowering the *default* Effort setting from "high" to "medium" to reduce latency, which was later reverted. The key insight is that a smaller, capable model (like Sonnet) on high Effort can often outperform a larger, more powerful model (like Opus) on low Effort for many tasks. The article provides a practical troubleshooting framework: if Claude makes an error, first check the context and instructions. If it seems to skip necessary steps or validations, increase Effort. If it diligently attempts the task but fails conceptually or makes consistent factual errors despite good context, then consider switching to a more capable Model. The takeaway is a shift in focus: effective AI programming is less about always choosing the "strongest" model and more about intelligently *orchestrating* models and effort levels—acting like a project manager to assign the right "brain" with the right level of diligence for each job, optimizing both results and cost.

marsbit9m ago

Claude Accused of Becoming Dumber by the Entire Internet, Anthropic Steps In to Reveal: It’s Not the Model That’s Tricking You

marsbit9m ago

Will the Ethereum Foundation Evolve into a 'Mascot'? Diversified Organizations Are Fragmenting Its Functions

The Ethereum Foundation (EF) is undergoing significant internal turmoil and functional erosion. Following its largest-ever layoff of 54 staff (20% of its workforce) and a major organizational restructuring announced in June, its Protocol Support Team has been officially dissolved. This comes alongside the high-profile resignation of key figures like co-executive director Xiaowei Wang, bringing senior departures this year to at least eight. Criticism of EF's rigid structure, opaque decision-making, and perceived lack of a clear value narrative for ETH has intensified within the community. The layoffs have catalyzed the emergence of independent, non-profit organizations like Ethlabs and Ethereum Institutional, founded by former EF researchers and members. These entities are now taking on core functions such as protocol research/development and institutional adoption, effectively fragmenting the EF's traditional leadership role. Concurrently, EF's security team is adapting to technological change, deploying specialized AI agents to audit Ethereum's codebase, which successfully discovered a critical vulnerability (CVE-2026-34219). While EF states AI complements rather than replaces researchers, it signals a potential future shift in its operational model. Faced with these challenges—internal restructuring, talent drain, the rise of competing organizations, and AI integration—the Ethereum Foundation appears to be stepping back from a central commanding role. Analysts and community observers speculate it may increasingly transition towards a symbolic "ecosystem mascot" function, while decentralized initiatives drive Ethereum's future growth and institutional adoption.

marsbit35m ago

Will the Ethereum Foundation Evolve into a 'Mascot'? Diversified Organizations Are Fragmenting Its Functions

marsbit35m ago

Is LIT’s burn worth $42 million enough to spur the altcoin’s next big rally?

Lighter (LIT) has experienced significant volatility, rallying 18% over the past week but facing potential overbought conditions. After a warning of a correction toward $2, the price dipped to $2.3 before recovering to $2.60. A major catalyst was the recent burn of over 15.6 million LIT tokens (worth ~$42 million), representing 6.3% of the circulating supply, which may have spurred short-term bullish momentum toward $3. Technical analysis on the 1-day chart shows a bearish divergence with the RSI, signaling a potential pullback despite strong demand. The key Fibonacci retracement level to watch is $2.30. On the 4-hour chart, LIT is forming a range between $2.31 and $2.68. The suggested strategy is to wait for a breakout above $2.70 to target $3.06-$3.21, or a breakdown below $2.31 for a likely deeper retracement below $2. In summary, while bullish momentum persists, traders should monitor the range boundaries for the next directional move.

ambcrypto3h ago

Is LIT’s burn worth $42 million enough to spur the altcoin’s next big rally?

ambcrypto3h ago

Nearly a Hundred Players Rush into Embodied Data: With 4.47 Billion Yuan in Financing in One Year, Who Can Really Make Money by 'Selling Data'?

The domestic embodied AI data industry has attracted nearly 100 players, with 70 focused on data collection and 27 on data infrastructure. In the past year, 15 independent embodied data service providers raised approximately 4.47 billion yuan. Despite this growth, the sector remains early-stage, fragmented, and faces significant challenges. Data collection methods are diverse, categorized into four main routes: teleoperation of real robots, human demonstration without a robot (using motion capture, exoskeletons, etc.), simulation synthesis, and distillation from internet videos. Most companies (43%) adopt hybrid approaches, combining multiple routes, as no single method can meet all training needs. Teleoperation alone is pursued by 31% of players, often by state-owned platforms and robot companies, while newer firms favor asset-light, no-hardware human demonstration. Independent data service providers now form the largest player group (40%), indicating the emergence of a distinct industry segment rather than just a subsidiary function for robot makers. Two-thirds of all players are "embodied-native" startups, while one-third are companies that pivoted from fields like AI data annotation, which are more prevalent in the data infrastructure layer. Current annual industry capacity is estimated at 1.6-1.8 million hours plus 70-80 million data points, with a short-term goal to increase this 15-20 fold within 1-3 years. Data collection factories are spread across 20 provinces in China, concentrated in the Yangtze River Delta, Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, and Pearl River Delta regions. Financially, the 4.47 billion yuan raised in the past year pales compared to the 43.8 billion yuan raised by the broader embodied intelligence sector in just the first half of 2026, highlighting that data remains a less "sexy" bet for investors. The 15 funded independent providers show clear stratification: a top tier led by a unicorn (Lightwheel Intelligence, 3.1 billion yuan), a middle tier of 11 firms raising tens to hundreds of millions, and an early-stage tier of 3 companies. Sixty-nine investment institutions have participated, but none have made concentrated bets, reflecting uncertainty about viable business models. Over half of these funded companies are less than a year old, most are at pre-A or A rounds, and profitability remains largely unproven. In summary, the embodied data industry has become an independent track creating jobs and local economic activity. However, it is still nascent, with unformed consensus, unsolved problems, and unproven business models. The coming 1-2 years will be a critical validation window to see if companies can build sustainable, profitable businesses purely by "selling data."

marsbit3h ago

Nearly a Hundred Players Rush into Embodied Data: With 4.47 Billion Yuan in Financing in One Year, Who Can Really Make Money by 'Selling Data'?

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot