Did I understand correctly that you are trying to refute that costs are measured in money? There is nothing much to comment on here.

"1 BTC is worth 1 BTC"
OK. Let's calculate in BTC. How many bitcoins do you currently need to rewrite the code? Let’s estimate it at 1000btc. I won't be much mistaken.  Total bitcoins are ~19 million.

Spend 0.053% of system cost to scale the entire system by 10x. Is this a good scaling?

It's strange that you count the resources spent in bytes, in "virtual bytes". When all over the world, resources spent are usually assessed in monetary terms.

Now, thanks to the development of technology, a modern computer can process blocks of 10 MB in size without problems and without significant additional costs. (It's time to record this fact and not come back again)

And it turns out that simply by rewriting the code, we can increase the capabilities of the system, which is now valued at ~$700 billion, by 10 times. I repeat, just rewriting the code.

Evaluate the ratio of the results obtained to the resources spent. Isn't this ideal scaling?

What does a lot mean? That's ~$100 per year. When do users now pay $10 fees per transaction?

Why didn’t they calculate it for 10MB blocks? After all, the conversation now is about precisely this increase.

Or they did the math and realized that it was somehow inconvenient to post such calculations.

We decided right away for 100MB. blocks. Only now there was a mistake. These calculations do not scare anyone.

Why be modest? Others usually go straight to 1GB blocks. There the numbers will be more impressive.

This is an incorrect statement. To be blunt, you are lying.
Not every block increase results in a loss of decentralization.
As evidence, we can refer to your favorite Segwit.
Since 2017, after the adoption, the real physical block size has increased, but no one talks about the loss of decentralization. Everyone understands perfectly well that the network will not even notice an increase in the block by the estimated 1.7 times.

Computer bought for the same price:
1. in 2008 copes with a 1mb block
2. in 2017 copes with a block of 2-4 mb.
3. in 2022 will easily cope with a block of 4-8mb.

You can reasonably increase the block without necessarily increasing costs. Nobody wants Bitcoin to break.
Above, we have already given a bunch of information about how much technology has grown. But you choose to ignore them.
And you continue to get moldy arguments from many years ago from the dusty attic.

It seems to me that you are not quite accurate in using the word "real". If we had increased the block size by 2-4 times in 2017, then perhaps we would now have 2-4 times
increase in the number of transactions. And that would definitely be real scaling.
Instead, you are suggesting that we all hope for some other "real scaling". Which in practice can be just an unsuccessful experiment.

I settled more comfortably on the couch. I want to hear from you a cheerful report on how much progress you have achieved in your "real scaling" over the 5 years since 2017.

“Bigger blocks make it harder to scale the network”

Therefore, we will freeze the block size - which, in fact, CANCELS the network scaling.

Iron logic.

Imagine the situation. Bicycle rental agency. 10 bicycles. The average number of clients per day is 100. Bicycles are occupied 90% of the time.
The owner wants to increase the number of customers by 10 times and asks his friends for advice on what he should do for this.
What they recommend to him:
1. Increase advertising
2. Replace bicycles with more comfortable ones
3. Train customers, because not everyone knows how to ride it.
4. Stimulate the staff so that the quality of service is better.
... and the like.

It seems that all the tips are correct. But in this case, all these tips can be thrown in the trash. They won't work.

Anyone with a minimum of knowledge in mathematics will tell him:
"Dude, in order to increase the number of customers by 10 times, you definitely, first of all, need to increase the number of bicycles by 10 times. There's no way without it."


Bitcoin.
~350 thousand transactions per day. ~10 million users per month. And this is the maximum.
The blocks are filled with transactions by more than 90%. That is, we have almost reached this maximum.

Our goal is mass adaptation. Once again, "MASS". Which implies a 10-100 fold increase in the number of users.

And now questions are being raised on the forum:
Why is there no mass adaptation? What should we do for this?
And why is the number of users not increasing many times?
And what prevents Bitcoin from growing ?
What is this "mysterious enemy" that prevents Bitcoin from taking over the whole world?


And what answers are given on the forum. Can you run through the topic from beginning to end:
Government - ?
Unstable price - ?
Bitcoin is too complicated - ?
Need more Bitcoin advertising - ?
...

People! Are you serious?

The only correct answer to the question of what prevents Bitcoin from mass adaptation at the moment is ... Bitcoin.