This is serious. Convince me please.
Hmm,
There is no technical reason that the block size can not be increased to 8MB with no real concern.
The other side makes an argument , the increased blocksize will cause less people to run full non-mining nodes.
The problems with their argument is this, Bitcoin Cash has proven 8mb is doable without any major issues,
Bitcoin Cash increase to 32 mb is too much too soon as their 8mb blocks were not even full.
Actually, BCH network proves nothing, it doesn't process enough transactions, there is not enough transactions out there to process.
On the other hand calculating the situation with a practically loaded network with larger block size would easily show a specific level of centralization side effect because of propagation delay and proximity premium for larger pools, they switch to mining new blocks more earlier while the remaining of the network have to validate much more transactions.
On the contrary, a
one-time block time decrease, would be helpful for decentralization because of reducing variance (by increasing the sample numbers). Generally, variance is a more critical problem for centralization compared to propagation delay, so block time decrease has a net positive outcome in terms of decentralization.