I think this is a nicely put together visualisation (my only criticism is that it may have actually erred slightly on the side of being too technical but I guess that depends upon the target audience).

A hell of an infographic! Well done at least we finally have something to discuss on, I mean real points to be discussed not just thin air.
And, above all yes, this is about changing the world guys, not being a paypal alternative.

Indicative of the levels of cynicism and maturity (not to mention desperation) employed by the blockchain-bloaters: knight22 only really came into the thread so he could run home to bitcoin.com crying "they censored me, nasty fat hobbits with their censoring". Kind of pathetic really, I always thought the ringwraiths were supposed to be badasses 

Fantastic graphic. In storage every bit counts.

For me it is impossible to understand the technical explanations and various details of this kind but it easily understandable that, if eveything in main post is true, there is no need to increase the size of blocks (and that the war of the development core people is made only based at selfish reasons) and that the bitcoin could be a much more better product than it is already. A such improvement of a great invention put in the trash every kind of doubt about its R.I.P. as a product and even its role in the world of peer to peer. Then, if it would be possible to be realized even the last foreseen which see it as the base of the new internet (about which, according to my very poor knowledge in such field, are "fighting" even other peer to peer projects - one of which known by me is the project of them who are behind ethereum) would make it again the King of the Kingdom of peer to peer. As it was when was born but not as it is in the today cryptocurrency world when are not few the cryptos which (as is told by them who can do such kind of comparisons) there are cryptos better than it. If it would be the King of Kingdom of the peer to peer, that mean that it would be the King of the tomorrow real and virtual world.

It's not just possible, it's already happening, and happening very fast! Be ready!

Node count should be considered centralized when people with decent computers cannot run a node on their bedroom, this is I think very clear. If people can't run a node on a single computer, its when the centralization process starts and once it starts it will expand like mining, it will end up getting "specialized", so it's crucial that we never get past that point where people can run nodes at home.

I don't have a technical background and for me it was fine. It was actually nice to see some of these issues explained.

Great work putting this together, it really sends out a message of hope after the recent negativity.

As usual, Franky: get out of town with that garbage

The processing that gets done when a Skype call or Netflix streaming session gets downloaded is low compared to Bitcoin blocks. Cryptographic proofs need satisfying to validate the new block and it's contents. The way it is now, the amount of processing needed scales quadratically, i.e. to the fourth power every step change. That kind of burden (a doubling then raised to the power of four) could see nodes checking transaction signatures and resolving coinbase merkle roots for the entire block interval i.e. <10 minutes.

So, your simple presentation is a little too simple. Please try to improve.