The Toomininstas are confronting the same problem the Gavinistas did, which is that multiplying a tiny number such as 3tps by another tiny (ie sane) number such as 2 or 4 or even 8 still only produces another tiny number such as 6tps or 12tps or 24tps.
You can't get to Visa tps from here. Our only realistic path to Visa is orthogonal scaling, where each tx does the maximum economic work possible.
Obviously you cant scale to Visa with onchain transactions and keep node decentralization. But it does not mean you cant increase to 6tps or 12tps right now and give users much better experience with Bitcoin so it is well worth while keeping node decentralization, not insignificiant and unnecessary as you say.
If you prove we will not see over 10 TB HDDs in mass production in the following 6 years, then you can get some big blockers more sceptical about scaling above 2 or 4 MB. So go ahead.
You said 10-100TB, which implied a tenfold increase in 6 years. This is not likely.
Today it is not uncommon people have 2 TB with minority of nerds having 8 TB/16 TB.
It is not unreasonable to expect in 6 years replace the terms in the sentence above with 10 TB, 50 TB/100 TB. This is what I meant. Sorry for confussion if you thought average 55 TB in 6 years.
so you will need to really spend most time on last about 2 months of syncing only and not about half a year as of now... pretty easy fix helping scalability for new nodes syncing from 0
Your solution is checkpoints?
No, it can help a bit though if the checkpoints are updated more often. If you dont care read and think about my post what I really meant why you reply then...