Sorry - I did not mean to offend. That was the rhetorical 'you'. I know you run a node - you've told me so, and if not, I would have assumed you did from your other postings. As do I.
I am more referring to the notion that node operational costs must be kept to an absolute minimum. In my opinion, if a potential operator is not willing to have some skin in the game, they will be worthless as a node anyway.
I think that Bitcoin has many more years (maybe decades) where it will need to defend itself from external attacks. It's simply too disruptive. I mean you have major western governments implementing additional capital controls on a regular basis and Bitcoin is quite obviously a way to avoid those controls. I don't think they are going to simply shrug their shoulders.
This is why I think it's very important to keep the requirements to run a node, and sustain the network, as low as possible.
This is why I think scaling should be done on an additional layer than can be peeled away should the need arise.
I'm sure I someone will come along and call me paranoid for having such views. Considering current events, I don't think a little paranoia is a bad thing. I prefer to look at it as being prepared. Erring on the side of decentralization is the prudent choice in my opinion.