I'm more of the opinion that Bitcoin will succeed, provided that it does not fail, and that a misstep can easily be worse than doing nothing.
Intelligent people may disagree with this.
The question is, what more qualifies as "doing nothing":
- Letting Bitcoin operate with constantly full blocks, which has never been done before, or
- Continuing to let Bitcoin operate with non-full blocks, effectively uncapped,* as it always has
?*
Of course a large part of the debate is over whether the current hard cap is actually doing anything. So the appeal to conservatism implied by "doing nothing" just pushes the question back.Your question presumes omniscience thus it is not falsifiable. Junk science.
For example, it may be the case that the vulture capital is waiting for the exponential block size scaling before they unload the masses into Bitcoin via Paypal, Coinbase, Circle, Facebook, 21 Inc, etc.. With the intent of forcing out ephemeral miners and achieving distributed centralization and KYC regulation every where.
Actually that outcome is the one I think is nearly assured no matter which direction we go, because one could speculate that they've also invested in pegged side chains as an alternative where those entities can push the masses into a side chain which extracts the BTC value out of Core, and then they cut loose the hashrate on Core (and any other merged mind side chains) and send it
off into nowhere, nowhere land.
Then again, I am onto their plans and working on the antidote.