Just of note, I tend to deliberately keep that argument out of here. It's not really relevant and tends to upset the natives. I'll usually only bring it in where I think it's directly relevant and then only in relation to BTC itself (i.e. I'll discuss capacity but not in relation to other coins which have addressed it).
I *sort of* appreciate this. And I am sure there are some who would get hot under the collar. But I personally think the scaling discussions are still of extremely high importance. We are moving forward all of us having no idea where we are going. That's why I say "sort of". I think it's an important discussion. As long as it does not devolve into "You're dumb", "Read the whitepaper" type stuff. Which is mostly what reddit is.
I personally WANT someone to broaden my thought models. If I could really plant a flag in the big block ideas in a way where I feel confident it would work. I think Satoshi thought it might, for example, while Hal Finney seemed to be the proto small-blocker.
The white paper is always brought up. And Satoshi had not anticipated ASICS (who knows if that later Satoshi email is real where "he" talks about exactly that) and that changed EVERYTHING. It made the idea of the "validation node" important. Vitally important. We discovered by this tech that between hashing, and consensus validation the latter *might* be more important, though they go deeply hand in hand.
Anyway, i welcome discussing this, and would take part in another thread if it should not happen here.