it would not make sense to use the worst possible examples as our baseline.
That baseline doesn't make sense
if your goal is to optimize tx per second. But why bother, when Visa/Paypal/Square can do that already very well.
OTOH, if you GAF about survivability of the diverse/diffuse/defensible/resilient network, you plan for the worst (and hope for the best).
Gavin wants to plan according to some rosy vision of the future, where the economy is all fine and dandy thanks to Helicopter Ben printing endless FunBux.
I want Bitcoin to survive World War Three (working subtitle 'Requiem for the Petrodollar').
That's not going to happen if Bitcoin lives in first strike targets like Google.mil datacenters.
Just to be a realist for a minute, if there is a WW III, then I would value many other things that bitcoin. Solar panels, food source, water supply, etc.
I suppose that what is the future that we are trying to achieve with bitcoin? Decentralized? tx per second? Everyday use?
All of those, but particular to different aspects of the Bitcoin gestalt.
Uppercase-B Bitcoin (or lowercase in Szabo notation)
the first viable and most secure ecash competes with gold and central banks.
Lowercase-b bitcoin (or uppercase in Szabo notation)
the blockchain technology competes with Visa/Paypal/Square (via altcoins now and SC/LN later).
Gold has kept its value through two world wars (and still gets you across guarded borders better than food/drinks/gadgets).
Bitcoin will not just keep its value in the exorbitant violence and chaos concomitant to petrodollar collapse (ie WW3), it will arise to take its rightful place as the world's reserve currency.
Start reading here, if you want to appreciate the "future that we are trying to achieve with bitcoin."