Dexon by LamboPopo

I am personally super interested in Dexon,
Really want to hear anyone is also interested, I would like to have deep dive understanding if the whole idea works. After all

A quick brief of my very limited understanding,
Dexon is combining the idea of gossip protocol(Hashgraph) & blockchain idea to solve the scalability issues.
Dexon team claims theoretically Dexon can infinitely scale, and still remain decentralized.

I am curious if it is achievable, and need some explanation on their consensus algorithm, if anyone have a deep understanding, pls let me know, I would like to have a quick chat.
Also they are backed by IDG capital, which make them seems more promising.

Their official website:

1 Like

If Popo can pull Dexon off, it will be quite epic. Its a variation of Hashgraph protocol, I believe, and similar in approach to NANO. Every wallet or node will have capacity to process it’s own transactions, so scalability is, in theory, infinite and truly decentralized. This is what traditional blockchain (i.e. Bitcoin, cough, cough) cannot do and probably never will be able to scale to levels every day use would call for – which is fine as long as Bitcoin holds up it’s trump card as a store of value and doesn’t find itself trapped under complete Chinese control with > 70% of all mining hashing power for Bitcoin inside China’s borders.

Sharding is already a part of the protocol from the outset, so doesn’t have to be engineered into an existing ecosystem as with Ethereum. They call the “blockchain” in this project the “lattice” and it’s a pretty good visual concept describing on what’s going on under the covers.

I hold a fairly decent position in COB, so I’m a little biased in my comments here, but generally speaking, I like what I see and want to see Cobinhood and Dexon succeed because I think Popo’s is in the right frame of mind with regards to how to truly solve decentralization problems of current blockchain technology, so I support the work they’re doing. Whether they succeed or not remains to be seen as they’re really struggling to bring people to their platform and have consistent trading volume. Cobinhood also failed to having break out success with any of the ICOs they sponsored and COB itself is way, way down off it’s peak.

When Popo announced Dexon as separate project from Cobinhood, it angered the general community of early adopters and believers, so there’s a bit of backlash to deal with as many thought it was all one project when they decided to invest.


Hi mwlang, thank you for your reply,
Really happy to hear such a thorough reply from you.

I have taken a look into the case of NANO, and the backbone of these two projects are almost identical. Since they are both proposing a block lattice structure, one of the reason that both of them intrigue me the most is

  1. can they include Ethereum or bitcoin blockchain as part of their blocklattice structure?
    1-1.if so does that mean they can become the intermediary layer for the cross chain swap?
    1-2. do u foresee both of them being able to capture portion of the value of other blockchain for being a intermediary layer, and become a backbone of the D-exchange?

  2. Meanwhile, I digged into the Dexon consensus whitepaper, they are trying to solve the ordering problem for blocklattice since each shard will constantly and rapidly proposing their own blocks, so I can imagine the hard time trying to figure out the fair ordering timestamp.
    I can not find NANO addressing the problem, do you know where I can find it?

FYI, I also love the Cobinhood idea, and personally invested as well, so I guess we are all biased. Which is ok, that’s how bitcoin accumulate value in the past.

Also, I do believe BTC’s miner centralization is a big problem, but meanwhile i suspect it will be decentralized again when more hardware producer want to make their crypto money.
Further, I suspect that the Producer & the miner has the incentive to double spend BTC. becuz they will lost much more if they have done so.

Lastly, I start to think perhaps Dexon are actually both POS and POW,
Becuz to host a node they need to stake, at the same time, they reward should be coming from how fast and how many transaction a computer can ack on each other.

Pls feel free to correct me, if I am wrong at any technological idea, since I am not a coder.

1 Like
  1. If by “include” other blockchains, you mean will they bridge to others? Answer is yes:

  1. I think they addressed this one upfront and have theoretically solved it (whether it works in implementation or not, we’ll have to see!).

Front-Run Attack Resilience
A block miner in typical blockchain systems can independently determine the transaction ordering
within a block, launching a front-run attack . In some applications like decentralized digital asset
exchanges, the front-run attack problem is serious because a malicious miner always has the
option to perform arbitrage based on the transaction information it receives as a miner. This
gives him a perpetually unfair advantage over other traders.

On the other hand, no single mining node in DEXON can determine the transaction ordering in the
DEXON consensus algorithm because the final consensus ordering of a transaction is determined
by all mining nodes in the blocklattice data structure. DEXON determines a transaction’s
consensus timestamp by calculating the median time that the majority of all nodes in the network
witnessed the creation of a given block, which is considered “truly fair.”


💰 YEN · YouTube ·️ YEN.CAMP 🧠