he is on record claiming its ok turning bitcoin into paypal 2.0 if that is the result of getting a blocksize thats big enough to guarantee fast cheap onchain transactions.
did you even read the article and calmly understand the context.
he said he would gladly let core have their LN (paypal2.0) if it meant core would let the community have dynamic blocks to grow bitcoins main net naturally.
meaning making LN(paypal2.0) voluntary side service bcause there would be enough room on the mainnet for both..
and not what core wants, which is
a compulsory offchain commercialised service which core want due to core restricting natural scaling of the mainnet to force people offchain.
WAKE THE HELL UPactually understand the reality of the world.
its core that want to make the commercialised offchain permissioned service. (paypal2.0 aka LN HUBs)Dynamic block size ends up with the same problem: Attackers could exploit it by making the block size too big for normal people to host nodes. You can add dynamic fe but at that point the fee would bee too high and we are back to the same problem.
If it was as easy as that then the dynamic blocksize solution would have been already implemented but pro-dynamic blocksize people never explain the negatives.