Don't get me wrong, block chain has some wonderful applications. But at some point, crypto currencies veered off the idealistic track.

Let's spare ourselves the analogies of crypto mining consuming amounts of energy comparable to small nations, and realize the fact that it consumes a tremendous amount of electricity. This, as we all sit here in the sweltering heat, should make us angry.

I propose that, in theory, we have mined all the crypto we need. Further mining will only empower those with the means to continue mining, which is contrary to the objectives of a distributed block chain, particularly a zero-trust currency. Look no further than the large donations being made by Andreessen and Horowitz to their politician of choice (Donald Trump), mostly because they believe his administration will give them more power with crypto.

Mining crypto is really just a gamified incentive structure intended to motivate sys admins to run nodes on the network. These nodes have become so expensive to operate, the power over the network has collapsed onto a few nodes ... the network effect.

One possible solution is to bundle small transactions into a settlement period, similar to trading markets in the classical financial system. Then these transactions can be settled at the end of the settlement period (24 hours, for example). The problem is that we would need some central authority to collect and bundle transactions, which would require some level of trust.

Is there a centralization/trust tradeoff to be made here against centralization of power and climate damage?