I love to see the continued adoption of L2s, especially open-source ecosystems like the OP stack

However, until we solve the UX of bridging we’re not going to see the significant adoption needed to drive the next wave 

I refuse to hold 42 different types of ETH and the cognitive overhead that comes with it

Building /bright-moments - minting onchain art IRL | /purple #15 | FID 129 #magikarp

Rome, Metropolitan City of Rome Capital, Italy

I'm not convinced that the future is tons of L2s with bridges.

Why shouldn't L2 have a winner dynamic the way L1 has?

Once you have one that's fast, secure, and permissionless, & some critical mass of adoption, why use another? You'll still have competition among sequencers, bundlers, searchers, etc just like L1

Real World Ethereum 🌎 
building /daimo ✳️ 

I disagree. I think there will be many many more L2s. The difference between L1s and L2s is that L1s have a notion of “economic security” so their economic mass attracts more mass while the L2s are about execution environments and the details of the applications impacts what’s the best execution environment.

Co-founder & CEO @goldchain a gaming L3 | Space cadet on @skyoneer | MIT | Blockchain dev since 2016 | /lostfounder

This is a very fair point, 2 arguments in favor of multiple L2s is better controlling  gas costs and you can be preferential/opinionated about things like MEV and block ordering in your specific application context

I could see that for specialized L2s (privacy, mips for crazy things like OPcraft)

But EVM L2s all have the same execution environment. In fact they’re competing to be more same—EVM equivalence