I remember you saying a few days ago that there is a clear "unbroken trend up". Though I don't agree that it is evident from the chart you offered as a proof (it should be considered as flat there, at best), I do agree that the overall trend shows an increasing number of daily transactions on average. In fact, I
myself suggested to use the amount of daily transactions as a metric for evaluating Bitcoin adoption rates. And now you start basically claiming that we are not there yet...
How come really?
Either I am writing unclearly, or ...
I think it should be obvious that when I say "we do not need such raw technological capability today", I am referring to the absurd notion -- articulated upthread by Carlton Banks -- that we would need to increase blocksize
by a factor of 100,000 immediately.
You don't get it, absolutely
You basically say that we will already have all those capabilities (network bandwidth, storage capacity, processing power, etc) by the time when we actually need them, thanks to technological advances, mind-boggling break-throughs and other buzz words that people so love to repeat. Okay, let's assume that it might be so, since we can't deny that for sure (though this is debatable). But at the same time, you claim that we, today, are already hitting some limits (namely, the blocksize limit), and nothing is effectively done to overcome these issues. In other words, wtf are you talking about even if SegWit activation is still undecided?
Everything he said is indeed really confusing, because all the existing technologies in the bitcoin only sourced in the mines, so for the issue of the confirmation late because there are indeed some cause they do. and most often done fee that does not fit by the standards that have been recommended or prescribed. So this is all because of human error and not because of technology that works in the bitcoin, if you don't believe then it could prove in the way that suits you