The problems with their argument is this, Bitcoin Cash has proven 8mb is doable without any major issues,
Btrash bcash didn't prove anything.
The transaction volume on bcash is so extremely low, that blocks are always empty. They even would be called empty with 1 MB block size.
The last 10 blocks have a median size of less than 50 KB. That's 1/20th of the old legacy bitcoin block size. Honestly.. that's a joke. Dogecoin has more transactions than btrash.
Saying bcash has provem 8mb is doable, is delusional.
There other argument is increasing the blocksize won't really scale, the problem with that is they don't need to scale to match visa, they only need to scale to match what bitcoin requires, which 8 mb would handle easily for the foreseeable future.
Please explain:
How can increasing something by a linear factor be called scaling ?
Spoiler: It can't, because that's not scaling. That's ignoring and postponing a problem.
Increasing capacity by ANY amount is scaling. In the world of tech, we scale to the limit of technology and demand, we don't need to scale things to infinity to have a scaling solution.
Bitcoin Cash YESTERDAY, put thru blocks of over 10kb and even blocks of over 20mb to prove that it is feasible to process that many TX at low fees simply by not hitting the capacity limit and thus imposing fee competition. BTC is the cruel joke at such low limits so close to being triggered and setting off competitive TX fees.