You have repeatedly stated that increasing the resolution will make the judder problem worse. This is not the case, and you should be more clear, and specify why you think this is true.
For that matter, I don't understand this false impression that you have of people buying a higher resolution screen, and then thinking "boy, I should move my couch 6 feet closer to the screen!".
Viewing distances will always be subject to the size of your living room, not the resolution of the screen. I don't know about you, but growing up the TV was always completely across the room. Whether it was a 27" 640x480 crt, or my current 46", the couch goes on one wall, and the TV on the opposite. The only exceptions to this "rule" seem to be when people have large, open living areas and the couch is placed in the center of the space.
You are arguing against a resolution because of an aspect which has absolutely nothing to do with it. Don't fight against a resolution increase just because people are daft and don't understand that 48p is better for them, and switching standards would result in improved optimization of the format, which would include aritificial motion blurring.
None of what you are complaining about has anything to do with resolution whatsoever, including the absurd statement that viewing distances are getting shorter.
Yes, I will agree that minimum viewing distances are getting shorter, on paper. In reality almost nobody is taking advantage of that except in the case of desktop monitors. You aren't going to a theater and sitting twice as close to the screen because it is 4k now. Just like you, myself, and nearly everyone else out there won't be sitting 10 feet closer to the screen just because it is double the resolution.
And huge, 80" TVs are a tiny segment of the market. Sure, you will always have nitwits that will go buy the biggest tv they can afford, but most people buy a tv they think will go well with the room size. Thanks to the displays in stores, this always ends up being slightly larger than what they really need, but the most common sizes are 42" and 50", according to a quick google search I just did.
We have reached the point where larger screen sizes are impractical, just like we long ago reached the point where smaller cell phones are impractical. All technology eventually shrinks or grows to a practical limit which is defined by the size of average human. Of course this only generally refers to consumer goods, so please bear that in mind when reading that statement.
It might be entirely reasonable to stick an 80" 4k tv into a 20 foot wide living room based purely on minimum viewing distance, and surely there will be plenty of people who buy it. But those tvs almost certainly will include motion smoothing anyways, making your argument completely moot. In which case the problem is a lack of blurring, which is something you either love or hate.
Edited by Masta Squidge - 6/17/13 at 7:46am