Hacker News Reader

> I'm skeptical that crypto is even worse even if it incorporates wasting energy by design

The legacy transaction industry, if it does consume more energy, can move to begin to conserve energy because consuming energy is not in its design.

View on HN

How? Their inefficiency is tied to their design of having millions of people being employed keeping it afloat. What does hackernews think about the efficiency of 100k+ people orgs? I don't see much positive sentiment on that. Ultimately transactions still just abide by the laws of physics. If you live in Florida and I live in California, I want to trade my potted plant for your alligator egg, we can both walk and met in the middle, the transaction cost being the amount of calories we need to have the energy to walk 3000 miles. Efficiencies are found in bundling, we jump on a train full of people that want to go to Kansas to make other trades, or send a trading representative in a solar powered plane, but have to pay for solar powered plane crash insurance and escrow fee, etc. etc. So ultimately we are looking at legacy finance with massive baked in inefficiency of people, vs crypto with hard coded inefficiency by design. Is bucket 1 really going to beat bucket 2 if the volumes were similar? My intuition is no but would love to see real data.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com