-snip-
Well the hard limit is the average internet bandwidth around the world *10 minutes.
Which is alot. Even if you have a shitty 1 mb/s modem you can carry 600 mb /10 min.
Now maybe that info needs to propagate through the network so give it like 9 min to do so. Even then you can easily put 60 mb under current internet.
And in the future you will see an increase in internet. Cable internet is not needed anymore, so even from africa with good wifi you can use bitcoin.
I have 100mb/s internet, so for me the 1 mb/s block seems ridiculous
Well the hard limit is the average internet bandwidth around the world *10 minutes.
Which is alot. Even if you have a shitty 1 mb/s modem you can carry 600 mb /10 min.
Now maybe that info needs to propagate through the network so give it like 9 min to do so. Even then you can easily put 60 mb under current internet.
And in the future you will see an increase in internet. Cable internet is not needed anymore, so even from africa with good wifi you can use bitcoin.
I have 100mb/s internet, so for me the 1 mb/s block seems ridiculous
Your connection is not actually average. As shown by the picture, its not even average for your area. Also keep in mind that if you estimate 1mb/s you can not look at only blocks. I had days with ~23GiB traffic per day on my node, thats (23*1024)/144 ~ 163 MiB per 10 minutes. You are not part of the network if you only receive blocks you also have to relay transactions as well as blocks.
I still agree that we need bigger blocks or more efficient ways to store transactions. Im just against rushing to hard fork solution. As it currently looks segwit could increase size in blocks without a hard fork, by introducing a new transaction/address type. This can be done by soft fork, which is a known process and does not require everyone on the planet to update at the same time.
I dont think this will do so far pressure on the 
