I see only the fundamental design flaw in the decentralization. Copying a infinitely growing dataset to increasing amount of processing nodes is just worst kind of design error I can imagine in any decentralized system.
Bitcoin is designed to grow at a bounded rate, at the cost of capacity and latency. Another choice would be to eliminate those limitations, at the cost of practical verifiability by all stakeholders. There's not an easy answer for how to achieve all these goals at once.
yes, bitcoin is single linked list that's not even sharded. design is very flawed. can't believe these bitcoin followers think it's holy grail of technology. bitcoin can't even handle the current volume well. it requires massive computing power, bandwith, storage at every node.
BTC is designed to evolve. If the problems you’ve described do turn out to be major issues then node software will be updated to address those concerns. While difficult, I’ll admit, it is not impossible to add sharding (for example) to the BTC Core network.
If BTC is truly subject to evolutionary forces, then there is no logical reason to think it isn't heading down a dead end branch. How can you guarantee adding to a flawed technology won't see that "value" unravel , especially if something fundamentally different come along that solves the problem set without carrying legacy baggage or leaving collateral damage that each "fork" by definition must incur?