Juliano: I do strongly consider that layer 2s will get to a degree the place the sequencer is a community, slightly than only a single operator. And that can make the sequencers rather more decentralized, censorship-resistant. However the issue with having a single sequencer on layer 2’s proper now could be, the one sequencers aren’t censorship-resistant, proper? It is similar to, actually a server, and the server can refuse to course of your transactions if it needs to. Like, I am not making an attempt to select on anybody, like actually all of them are like this, however let’s simply take like Coinbase or Base for example. Coinbase is actually working a server that’s the sequencer for the Base chain. And in the event that they need to reject your transaction, for no matter motive, they’ll try this. And, , I believe they’re making an attempt to be as neutral as attainable. And that is superior. However that isn’t completely decentralized, I’ll say. And simply to show the purpose that I sort of perceive a lot of the arguments not less than, OK, there is a method to get across the censorship-resistance switches. Successfully, you’ll be able to return to layer 1, and ship a transaction to layer 1 and be like, Oh, Coinbase, it’s a must to embrace my transaction now as a result of I went to the layer 1. However that is a horrible product expertise, proper? Like perhaps that works for some edge instances, or if just like the lower than 1% of the time when, for some random motive any individual’s being centralized by a sequencer. But when there is a good quantity of alternative for a large quantity of the transactions to be censored on a given sequencer, for no matter motive, then this is probably not one thing that you really want in your community as a lot.
