It was stupid to make humans be energy sources (because they're not) rather than being a distributed computer as originally envisioned.
But, aside from description from an unreliable sources spouting what is explicitly revealed to be misleading-on-key-points religious dogma created as part of a system of control by the machines, there's no indication in the film that humans are sources of power in the film, and every indication that they are networked processing units (and even that agents, while they can be hosted in different humans over time, are hosted at specifically a 1:1 ratio on humans; or 1 instance per human once Smith is able to create multiple instances.)
Now, admittedly, in fact the description given was altered to please execs or test audiences (I forget which), but it actually works quite well in context.
The Matrix is infinitely more interesting conceptually and thematically from the network-of-minds angle.
This idea was discarded (I don't remember why), and it's interesting that the Wachowski brothers became the Wachowski sisters.
It would have been so much more philosophically interesting if that part had been left in.
(I'm not arguing about it being an interesting thing to put in the story, just speculating that they didn't think it added enough to the movie)
The "however inefficient" part hints that you might understand why it makes no sense. But it worked for you?
It's not just inefficient. It's negative efficient. You have to add more energy to a human than you can possibly get out of that human.
I'm going out on a limb but ... I think that perhaps the Wachowskis, even though they attended a high school "known for its performing arts and science curriculum", did a lot of daydreaming during their science courses.
It's a whole lot of unnecessary overhead compared to burning the fuel you are feeding the humans to generate energy.