systems must also be adaptive. otherwise they die.
Yes, we clearly disagree on the balance of dexterity and security. IMHO, There should be more testing done and we should be more careful as the market cap continues to grow.
if the market cap continues to grow.
IMO it is frutile to define the things we as acommunity disagree with. and also define criteria to see/know or acknowldege, when according to the criteria a certain perspective is invalidated.
i am all for the falsification or invalidation of my perspective, that a fee market is too early in the game. what could be the criteria too falsify me?
on the other hand which criteria will show me that a certain (too big) blocksize bears risks that i am (also depending on criteria) not willing to take.
the thing is both/all perspectives seem to be very maximalistic. the real challenge is to find the middle ground. divorce is easy. staying together when times are tough is the real mastery.
There are many objective and evidentiary levels that would make me feel more comfortable with increasing capacity higher and quicker. One example among many- a reversal in node drop of rate or increasing total economic node count , and not just the sybil attack created by the ignorant who feel they are contributing to the security by spinning up cloud nodes without economic agents behind them.
maybe it's also time to learn from others? https://www.ethernodes.org/network/1
what other incentives can there be to run a full node, we haven't thought of!?