I would say this post is extremely optimistic in that the problem everyone says Bitcoin has... doesn't exist. And as always I make sure to point out that crypto is a collaboration and not a competition. And the problem I voiced was then counterpointed.

To say that we've tested our ability to put 21 Terabytes of data on chain a year is exactly the type of wild and completely unsubstantiated claim I was pointing out to begin with. Imagine someone running as fast as they could for 30 seconds and then being like, "I tested running as fast as I could so yeah obviously I could do that for like 5 hours straight. Here's how far I'll get in 5 hours." No dude: in 5 hours you'll be dead like the guy they named the marathon after. Not only that but the test itself is run in a completely controlled and sterilized environment that couldn't possibly hope to mimic the real thing in all its nuances.

It is not mathematically possible to prevent Hive bandwidth from having value. Doesn't matter how big the blocks are. It will have value if the free-market says it has value. If someone can swoop in and make $100 worth of profit by filling up our blockspace they're going to do it. And they will start paying for bandwidth if they run out and it's still profitable. Now there's a secondary market for buying bandwidth. Bandwidth now has value. The blocksize is completely irrelevant to this equation.