With that being said, not all "poor" people will want to run a bitcoin node since even the current 300GB and the 1MB size is way too huge for them, but when we make suggestions of increasing block size to 16MB or lift the cap altogether, we have to evaluate the technology capabilities worldwide and not just within 5-10 developed countries, just my 2 bytes on the subject.
My mechanic likes to say "you can pay me now, or you can pay me later, either way to fix the problem I am getting paid."
If we increase the block size then yes, running a node will be more money as you will need more drive space and more ram. (pay me now)
If we just use sidechains, (lightning, liquid, etc.) then the data size is still there BUT it's just in another database.
And you have the added complexity of running another app database whatever. (pay me later)
And if you and I are not connected that way (I am using lightning you are using liquid) then we are back to settling on the main chain.
It's not that any particular way is inherently better or worse, it's just that there is not a one size fits all solution so they all have their give and take.
-Dave
I don't think I can agree with this analogy, you see, your mechanic makes sense, if your car has a problem - it must be fixed, you can't ignore it, and delying it can only cause more harm, even if you were to sell the car without fixing it, it will be worth its price minus the fix.
On the other hand, the block size isn't really a problem, and even if it was a problem then delaying the fix works, in other words, the longer we stick to 1MB the less the size can get, and then eventually, the equipment needed to run a full node will become cheaper as we move forward, and the internet technology is going to improve (regardless of how fast that may happen).
Now back to why do I think the block size isn't a problem, people are still using bitcoin, they have not abandoned it, bitcoin still works just fine and has more transactions than most other coins combined.
What's even more important than all of this, is what do you expect from increasing the block size? most people I discussed this matter with think that when bitcoin becomes cheaper to transact, more people will use it, and adoption will go to the moon, but I don't see that happening for a few reasons.
1- Other coins with instant confirmation and almost zero fees are not being accepted everywhere and don't have a fraction of bitcoin adoption.
2- The main layer isn't suitable for micropayments and every day's transactions, you are always subject to wait for hours until your transaction is confirmed, and if confirmation isn't important then people can still do with 1MB blocksize and pay the lowest fees possible.
There are many other reasons why blockchain as-is isn't fit to do the kind of things some people expect, increasing the block size could "solve" some "issues" but it can create worse issues.
