Only ~18500 nodes accessible worldwide. I run 3 of those, and 2 of them are pruned. 99% of people will never run their own node, which to me largely invalidates the argument against larger block sizes. I would rather have larger blocks and smaller fees. If I truly want to be my own bank, I would have no problem adding hard drives to a server.
Discussion
It matters how fast your node communicates with all other nodes globally. Consensus on the network takes time. Not to mention the storage problem.
Interestingly that's less than accessible Monero nodes.
Bigger blocks: Run LTC or BCH nodes
Private bigger blocks: Run XMR node
I suspect people running XMR nodes care more about privacy than the average Bitcoiner. Sad, but probably true.
So many maxis have never even downloaded Bitcoin core.
You need a node to maximise privacy and for
CPU mining.
I'd say that incentives are better aligned for Monero node operators than for Bitcoin.
Amd Monero is 99% price insensitive cypherpunks. While Bitcoin has 1% cypherpunks.
Considering privacy is the whole point of xmr, I would expect you're right about that.
Not to mention that when a miner broadcasts a block they have an advantage over all other miners if they find a hash with a high enough difficulty.
They broadcast that new block and are already working on the next block before the rest of the world knows. That's why you see alot of pools win multiple blocks in a row.
Exactly nostr:npub180x9vv4yuagf2w3qzmuertvv46ccee6n0wp0yh3zcz7nhyqrmzuqzjmehq At the crux, you're arguing more volume, lower fees. To achieve the same income as less volume, higher fees.
Higher throughput. That benefits the network and users. Efficiency.