Thread by @epolynya

This is the best argument against full modularity yet: reddit.com/r/ethereum/com…

@aliatiia_ has also made some of these arguments before.

Justin Drake argues for what I have previously called a "modular L1" as the ideal architecture in favour of a "fully modular" system.

What's a "modular L1?" - implementing rollups and data sharding, but all of these are enshrined within one protocol with one consensus. So, the rollups are all part of the L1. (I've previously called this "canonical rollups")

https://twitter.com/epolynya/status/1477143588743958530

Thus, the ideal architecture is actually starting with the most secure & liquid L1, build rollups and enshrine them into the L1, alongside a scalable DA layer. Alternatively, build a new modular L1 and see if it can gain security before the incumbent builds rollups & data shards.

To be clear, you can still build fully modular architectures, and many teams are, but they add new trust assumptions - some of which may be subtle (rollup governance). Rollups & data shards remain inevitable either way, but for the ideal scenario they would be enshrined.

This ideal scenario is much harder to achieve, and likely won't happen for years to come, if ever. So, pragmatically, we'll absolutely be in a world of many rollups & DA layers by many teams. With mature rollups the assumptions are actually very mild, but it's not perfect.

I was wrong about full modularity, and if I misinformed you in anyway, I deeply apologize. I had promised to myself if I was wrong about something I'd stop shitposting, and so I will. I'll continue using this Twitter account for advocating rollups & rollup projects as they mature

Small addendum: I think having a common programmable settlement layer for those enshrined rollups can be quite valuable as a way to coordinate bridges & liquidity.