1/ How important is Censorship Resistance for L2s ? Applications can censor individual users based on where they come from, or whole dApps could be rendered useless if Rollups censored all incoming txs to them. What are the possible solutions right now ? 👇@l2beatcom 
2/ @arbitrum and @optimismPBC allow users to "force" their transactions via L1. This is perhaps inconvenient for the end users, but it is a very generic mechanism that works for all dApps on a Rollup. And dApps don't need to do anything, it's just there. And it works
3/ @StarkWareLtd based L2s (@SorareHQ, @dydxprotocol, @deversifi, @Immutable) also have force transaction mechanism, but they are application specific. Namely, they allow you to force only certain tx (typically withdrawal request). It's as if each dApp had to implement it on L1
4/ Building generic "forcing" mechanism through L1 for zkRollups may prove to be a challenge - we will see once final version of generic computation zkRollups from @StarkWareLtd @the_matter_labs or @PolygonHermez are out
5/ Another approach is to "decentralize Sequencer", i.e. allow anyone to sequence transactions so that if users are censored, they can try to run their own. This comes with its own unique challenges, from possibly degrading UX, to the complexity of running multiple Sequencers
6/ Finally, Rollups can provide mechanism for users that are censored to move their assets out. This is obviously not ideal, but the minimum we should expect. You censor me ? I am out and move my stuff elsewhere
7/ And if you think censorship resistance is a non issue, you clearly were not denied @dydxprotocol recent airdrop 🙃
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
