It's not a sophism. The key word here is "liberty". Are you willing to compromise Bitcoin's decentralization by HARD-FORKING it to a bigger block size, so that you can buy your coffee at Starbucks and keep a permanent record of it in the blockchain? Bitcoin's enemies will still exist, and will still spam the network. Then what? Increase the block size even more, to accumulate more garbage? Another hard fork? Where does it end?
[ ... ]
I have yet to see anyone explain how increasing the blocksize increases centralization. It seems to be some idea that just took hold and that everyone believes in, because they believe in it.
And it
doesn't end. There will always be a need for improvements because there will always be competitors ready to take over if we stagnate. stagnation is death.
[ ... ]
Of course it doesn't end. The "it" in my "Where does
it end?" rhetorical question refers to the endless hard-forking, not to progress in general.
I don't think there's any point in analysing it any further. Some of us are conservative and choose the slow, scientific approach. Others are more impatient and want a solution "right here, right now". We can agree to disagree.