here's the billion-dollar question nobody wants to discuss: what happens when Ethereum L1 starts shipping features that L2s can't quickly adopt? L2s exist because Ethereum couldn't compete with Solana on performance. Fair enough. but here's the catch-22: L2s solved Ethereum's scaling problem so well that Ethereum stopped needing to solve it directly. now EIP-7702 lands (account abstraction that enables one-click transactions, MEV protection, and intent-based flows), and guess what? L2s have to scramble to support it. think about this from a protocol founder's perspective: you built on Arbitrum for speed and cost. now the cool kids on L1 have one-click transactions while you're still asking users for approval signatures. your grant-funded protocol suddenly feels second-class because the best features are on the L1. this wave of L1 innovation will reveal which L2s have flexible architecture versus which ones optimized so hard for specific features that they can't adapt quickly. some L2s are basically Android forks of Ethereum, easy to update when the base layer improves. others built custom VMs and will struggle with every major Ethereum upgrade. and the thing i find ironic: L2s were supposed to be Ethereum's distribution layer. but if L1 starts shipping better UX, do L2s become a bottleneck instead of an accelerant?