Well, thunder has been tested and optimized for throughput.

Maybe other L2s would also be tested and optimized for similar levels of throughput.

OK, I also wanted to ask that: if you thought it was a sound strategy to just have a bunch of ephemeral blockchains we can abandon, but I guess Thunder is already proposed as that.

That brings me to the next question: why not use Zcash sidechains as the payment scaling solution instead of Thunder?

(I know you'll say you don't make the rules and it is a possibility, but what is your opinion?)

fiatjaf8

in fact, when we analyzed zCash as a sidechain, one of the arguments I presented was : "every now and then, we can just start over with a new zCash-L2, and abandon the old one when the nullifier set gets too big"

Hi, this is Paul Sztorc - AMA

real_paul_sztorc

yes, I do know of the nullifier set

in fact, when we analyzed zCash as a sidechain, one of the arguments I presented was : "every now and then, we can just start over with a new zCash-L2, and abandon the old one when the nullifier set gets too big"

So - it sounds great.