Huge numbers of Bitcoin companies will be in locations where high-speed fiber is present. For people with poor internet service there should eventually be an alternative: satellite broadcasting of transactions and blocks, as per Jeff Garzik's bitsats proposal.
So it's not acceptable for the poor people to rely on 3rd parties... unless it's to trust them with the most important part: full nodes. The
satellite thing is a total joke, and does nothing to enhance security.
You're describing a world in which any derp with a satoshi gets to spam the network with his coffee purchase, and any government can take over the network if they control the high bandwidth regions. This is backwards and misses the point of bitcoin. "Hash cash" wasn't the revolution; distributed consensus was. Bitcoin is not valuable because "everybody has access." It's valuable because nobody can counterfeit.
I spent last week talking to some of the largest Bitcoin businesses (much bigger than Paymium/Bitcoin-Central or anything anybody in #bitcoin-assets is involved with), and they all want the maximum block size to increase.
Hahahahahaha! Of course your fellow
UnSavoryGarnish agree! Next you're gonna come in here saying a majority of senators support your proposal. You are scum, and there is a
tree in a pine forest somewhere with your name on it.