Free TON

Research: Can TON get to up 1 000 000 TPS? True Story of #1 blockchain network!

TON blockchain is one of the best blockchain architectures ever created by the Telegram Team. However, FreeTON can’t compete with Cardano, Solana, or Ethereum 2.0.

Here is why!

Modern blockchain networks trying to narrow down validators pools to speed up network performance by sacrificing decentralization mechanisms. It’s very well explained in that video (FASTEST Cryptocurrencies!! Blockchain Speed 101! 🏎 - YouTube) by Coin Bureau.

However, Telegram’s original design and architecture of TON blockchain were completely different than what we can see in “fun” projects like FreeTON. Keep in mind, FreeTON is not TON Blockchain supported by the Telegram team and probably never will.

Ton Labs team has built their philosophy that can co-exist with other ideas around the world and their work worth a compliment.

But let’s chat about TON Blockchain!

How Telegram could claim 1 000 000 TPS in their spec posted here (https://ton.org/)? Is that even possible?

The original setup of private but decentralized validator groups initially proposed by the Telegram team was a pretty unique experience in the blockchain industry. 21 validators seem to be enough for the Binance Smart chain network to outperform Ethereum. The amount of 100 main validators with powerful servers should more than enough to power a Telegram Internet protocol around the world.

The Telegram team was close to claim the top 1 Blockchain network slot on the planet and leave all competitors behind for many years. It could even put down Bitcoin and Ethereum. Vitalik Buterin was worried about that competition same as others vendors.

Sharding is a pretty common engineering issue. The larger is data size the less accessible it could be. There many database solutions to solve big data challenges, but blockchain networks with true native sharding future were released by the Telegram team, not Ethereum.

TON validator node beside its ton network adapter, proxy, and DNS with powerful sharding architecture could easily replace all blockchain networks available at that time.

1 Like

What’s the conclusion?

1 Like

Could you clarify, please:

  1. What is the purpose of this series of phrases? I can’t even call it coherent text.
  2. What is this post about? What is the conclusion?

Also I found the obvious logical errors here.

And why? Do you think the next phrase could be a proof?

In what strange logic?

First of all, it is not true. Free TON is entirely based on the telegram network design as it still uses the same open sourced code for C++ nodes.
Secondly, even if there were some differences, it does not prove that these differences worsen the protocol and make Free TON less competitive.

P.S. And I think if you were interested in the scope of development that is already done and currently underway, you would not call Free TON a “fun” project.
P.P.S. FYI: Free TON is spelled separately.

3 Likes

No result of the post, the suggestion is deleted.

And what is the purpose of all this?

Final message! TON can achieve more than 1M TPS, but freeTON can do less than 10k TPS. What is the point to support this network if Ethereum 2.0, Cardano, or Solan have a better benchmark?

1 Like

Free TON is also a centralised network totally controlled by its initial members. They are just giving TON to their partner friends and voice of community is also ignored.
In any open community controlled blockchain network only contribution is important but in Free TON even Jury Members Feedback can be ignored. Here is the proof of Voting Manipulation.

https://wiki.gov.freeton.org/submission?proposalAddress=0%3A7fe4dbe08eb1c7296a34a885a38345da5e2751ec3968ce7bdc52863460c8d718&submissionId=7

According to the rule and jury members feedback contribution is more important but some jury members started pressurizing other jury members to change their feedback.

Conclusion :

Free TON is a centralised network with a central control. Community haven’t any value for Free TON.

Maybe can you tell community about your fraud manipulations in Wiki contest, eh?)))

1 Like

Seems like even don’t know anything about Free TON ecosystem​:man_facepalming::man_facepalming::man_facepalming:

1 Like

Contribution and motivation matters at the most in a free network.

тебя забыли спросить, скамер

We have a lot of different subgovernances. This means we don’t have “a central control” and we are decentralised enough. And we’re preparing to switch to SMV 2.0 which gives us complete decentralisation.

Free TON is a community. Right now, the initial members of any subgovernance are usually the most active part of the our community. Their list is not fixed, it can be changed. And you too can become one of them if you contribute for some time.

I studied your links.
You should respect the rules that are accepted by the majority in your subgovernance. If you want to change them, you must first initiate a vote among the community members. In any case, the agreements should not be violated, because cheating is not accepted as a worthy behavior in any society.
Proposal that you are referring to is accepted by the major part of the SG. And it’s fair enough for me as you can “re-submit the corresponding submissions to the next WRC and re-claim reward for the same work”. So honestly, I don’t see any reason for you to complain.

1 Like

Please check the initial members of below linked subgovernance and then tell me about their activeness because these initial members haven’t even a forum account. We can’t call them active members of Free TON Community.

https://gov.freeton.org/proposal?isGlobal=0&proposalAddress=0%3A6c22d15afd0c1b9fc580962d3a4eb9f45c889ef3f44b2f38c74a6a7a56329831