It breaks the core rule of 1 mb blocks.
If you bother to read the whitepaper, you will find that 1mb blocks are in no way part of his vision. The 1mb limit was imposed as a temporary antispam measure and was meant to be removed long before the limit was reached.
In that case it seems like I am misinformed that it was one of the core rules. Thanks for pointing that out. I will read the white paper from a to z.
There's been an effort to rewrite history in regards to that point by certain parties. For example I've heard the claim that there was always a limit, even though the so-called limit being referred to was due to a bug in one of the libraries used in early versions of Bitcoin, rather than a feature there by design.
The whitepaper clearly describes scaling as involving full nodes being run out of datacenters and SPV wallets being the norm for users - the very same scenario that people are claiming will harm decentralization with big blocks. Relying on full nodes to be run by altruistic hobbyists is absurd. As long as there are businesses who have a need for their own full node in many jurisdictions, decentralization remains unharmed, whether nodes need to be run on high-end hardware or not.
Thanks for sharing your views. Very much appreciated. I have not yet made up my mind what to think exactly after what you told me. I first want to read the white paper to know every single detail. Obviously I was misibformed about 1 important detail. :) I do not know if I would be all to happy about businesses running the full nodes. A healthy mix between regular people and businesses would keep the network more save to my mind.