Jameson Lopp wrote about that, x4 difficulty and why 1 difficulty is regularly occurs for testnet blocks.
https://blog.lopp.net/the-block-storms-of-bitcoins-testnet/functionality for developers to run "signet" test networks that don't use mining at all, but rather use a federation of block signers
Very interesting. That means, signet was supposed to contain signing-only, without even CPU-based mining! Which means, my comparison between federations as a sidechain of Bitcoin is even more relevant than I supposed. Because that means, signet could be deployed on top of testnet3 as well, and just be based on signing blocks to prevent blockstorms! Which means, signet could be just a testnet3 soft fork, that could add signatures into blocks, based on signetchallenge! I wonder, why it was not deployed in that way. Is it only because of blockstorms?
Also, I can imagine testnet3, as a base for any signetchallenge, in that way it could be even a no-fork, where some signet could simply read data from testnet3, and reuse those coins in a more stable environment. Then, everything would be double-confirmed: first by signet signatures, and then by testnet3 Proof of Work. I am curious, how such model would behave in the wild.