Many people want larger blocks, we want on-chain transactions scaled way up. I'm yet to hear a good argument against large blocks. Storage is dirt cheap. Connections between servers are generally at least 1Gbps.
https://luke.dashjr.org/programs/kycpoll/answers.php
> Connections between servers are generally at least 1Gbps
So much for peer to peer electronic cash, then...
That's what happens when you're in a bubble. Your echo-chamber reflects the same ideas back to you.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not against Segwit at all, as long as the blocks are increased. So if someone wants to take their transactions off the chain, go right ahead.
> So much for peer to peer electronic cash, then...
Bitcoin is not peer to peer in the traditional sense, the money goes through the network of servers (nodes). It's called peer-to-peer, because there's no central bank, nor any authority that can stop the money flow.
However, the twist is that Blockstream gets Segwit first, while the 2x block size increase is 3 months away. During that time I expect Blockstream to be screaming to everyone that will listen to try to stop the block size increase from actually happening. They will likely not be successful but it will sadly continue to be a contentious issue until at least the end of October.