I don't think Mr. Graham is under any moral obligation to consider this issue unless it remotely plausible that NFTs issued for charitable purposes (or just NFTs, period) will "go mainstream" to the extent that they have any noticable environmental impact.

Is Ethereum anything like bitcoin in terms of power utilization/environmental impact?

Today, Ethereum uses about 1/6 energy consumption of bitcoin, while providing much more utility. But will change later this year as it transitions to proof-of-stake, at which point Ethereum's energy consumption will be negligible.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/blockchain-cryptocurrency-en....

Why in HN of all places do people constantly have years-old takes on crypto?

Ethereum is moving to proof-of-stake. Most other chains use some form of proof-of-stake.

It's not like these projects are unaware of your criticisms, nor have they stood still since you stopped paying attention in 2017.

> Most other chains use some form of proof-of-stake.

I don't think this matters unless you weigh these chains by something like popularity or market cap - who cares if a blockchain used by a few hundred people is using PoS? Bitcoin and Ethereum are the two big ones and neither use PoS (yet)[1]. Also, we have new blockchains like Chia that have found novel ways to waste resources that don't involve PoW.

[1] People have been saying that Ethereum is "moving to proof-of-stake" for years. Here's an article saying it's going to happen in Dec 2020 after a Jan 2020 deadline was missed: https://www.exodus.com/blog/ethereum-proof-of-stake-date/ Is this time different? I don't know. But saying Ethereum is moving to proof of stake is like saying "the market is going to crash". Yes, maybe, but when?

It's currently got PoS working alongside PoW - so it's already happening

Why in HN of all places? Because engineers are more resistant to bullshit hype. Proof-of-stake has not been proven at a large distributed scale.