I’d say that the security matters more when considering transaction costs, no? The article mentions solana as being significantly less resource hungry than bitc

I’d say that the security matters more when considering transaction costs, no? The article mentions solana as being significantly less resource hungry than bitcoin or ethereum, but solana is using a variation of PoS as far as I can tell. He mentions that ethereum is moving to something more efficient, which I understand it is, but again that is PoS. POS might be less resource intensive, but is prone to it’s own kind of centralization (e.g., those with the largest stake make the rules ,or decide transactions as the case may be). So the author’s argument that blockchains don’t have to be as wildly inefficient as bitcoin isn’t wrong. However, so far, that improved efficiency introduces various degrees of centralization. Centralization in a system that is effectively marketed as being secure because of its decentralized nature.