So what I was trying to say is 10 persons sharing the same computer is more decentralized than thousands of people using the same server. I think the majority of the community would agree with that.
Correct.
I'm still not convinced, what is your vision?
I'm against a dynamic block size because it fails to take into account the possibility of the miners intentionally colluding and manipulating the fee market, by either introducing scarcity or otherwise intentionally gaming the block size. Problem with dynamic block size is that it is difficult to accurately provision higher block size for the correct period, due to time lag mainly as the sample size is way too huge.
I would rather just proposing a predictable block size increase, than to have a dynamic block size because it is honestly quite redundant. I don't expect Bitcoin to survive solely on on-chain transactions, that isn't feasible.