segwit has not caused leaner transactions of actual byte counting.. they miscount the bytes and allowed longer scripts and even opcodes for scripts that are unrelated to signature proving a utxo spend
infact compared to pre 2017 the average byte length of a transaction has gone up MASSIVELY
But isn't that how all "compression" happens anyway with data? Even considering pruning, to the way I understand it, it's just discounting data, and thank you for the further explanations -- I doubt I can truly understand how it works, all I know is my txs are smaller in size from the way the wallet sees it. And that's how I see the theory of "leaner or more efficient" progress rather than bandwidth progress. It might require better cleaning up of clutter as you say, but I don't know enough to know why it wasn't done. I might need to see a visual example (but the way I understand is that the longer scripts anyway count for tx size, otherwise why did all these ordinals brc20 nonsense cost a lot?).
Pretty much out of my depth to be able to provide a meaningful response sadly...