Supposedly a Layer-1 fork that uses "Proof of History" mixed with TBSE's standard consensus. Basically, Solana meets TBSE.
I’ve been DCAing into TBSE for years, so when they announced , I was excited. But after digging through the explorer and the Discord, I found something weird.
I ran a node for 72 hours. Here are the raw metrics vs. the whitepaper claims. 🧵👇 tbse-x
📉 Verdict: TBSE-X is an experimental fork (the X stands for eXperimental, not 10x). Don't bridge mainnet assets to it yet.
I have designed it as a thread, as the "X" in the name suggests an experimental or next-gen token/technology. Option 1: LinkedIn / Medium Style (Professional & Analytical) Supposedly a Layer-1 fork that uses "Proof of
The experimental "X" architecture introduces sharding. However, sharding a TBSE-based state root is risky. Cross-shard transactions currently rely on a centralized notary pool (Phase 1). This reintroduces trust assumptions that the original TBSE was designed to eliminate.
🐛 The Bug: The consensus engine stalls when block height hits an odd number (Bug #TBSE-404). Devs patched it 6 hours ago, but the patch introduces a memory leak. But after digging through the explorer and the
Anyone else get whitelisted for the testnet? What's your uptime %?