August 8, 2023, Ethereum Layer 1 and zkSync payouts for the month of July are complete

Node Operators
,
1

Hello! Payouts for the completed month of July are complete.

This is the first month that had production Satellite (us1, ap1, eu1) payout rate changes. Please see our original announcement thread and our open for comments thread for more details about these changes. Despite the apparent magnitude of these changes (egress changing from $20 to $6, for example), this month’s total payout was 90% of last month.

For layer 1 payments, we paid 2,543 unique wallet addresses. There is no specific minimum payment threshold but it appears the pipeline was able to pay out for people who earned $8 or more.

For zkSync Legacy payments, we paid 1,792 unique wallet addresses. Everyone who opted into zkSync got a 10% bonus!

We attempted our first production test of our zkSync Era trial this month, but discovered we still have a few more things to button up before pulling the trigger. If you opted into zkSync Era, thank you for helping us test! You should have received payment as a separate transaction for nodes opted into zkSync Era using your preferred fallback mechanism (some over zkSync Legacy, some over Layer 1 if it cleared the minimum payment threshold). Some folks noticed these followup transactions occurred a bit later than the initial large batches.

If you want to specify willingness to use zkSync Era, you can do so in a similar fashion to zkSync, by modifying your wallet features configuration. The wallet features value is an ordered list and can include multiple values. Here is how you would specify preferring zkSync Era to zkSync Legacy, and zkSync Legacy to layer 1 in your config file:

operator.wallet-features: ["zksync-era", "zksync"]

And here is how you would specify it on the command line:

--operator.wallet-features=zksync-era,zksync

If you don’t want zkSync Legacy and want payments to fall back to layer 1 directly, only add zksync-era to the list of supported wallet features for your node (a surprising number of people have done this).

Across all layers, we paid 4,320 unique addresses. As always, if you have more questions, please make sure you’ve read through our mega FAQ.

The policies put in place regarding bonuses for nodes operated in Ukraine are still in place.

5 Likes
2

Since the majority of payments are still on L1 I don’t think this accurately reflects the significance of the payout rate change. For example, last month the minimum payout level on L1 was particularly high so my payment along that of others was held back until this month. That would have had the effect of masking the drop in monthly payout rates for myself and anyone else in the same situation. Instead what should be looked at is the monthly change in payout obligations (before the pay run is commended!) to SNO’s.

3

Perhaps large portion of those people did not realize that they need to specify fallback explicitly? (I’d assume most of those were already using zksync lite; I doubt people so vastly prefer era to lite to justify such a massive migration from L1)

It was a surprise for me too — I expected era to fall back to lite by default, not L1.

(I’m not saying this is wrong, just an aha moment reading that post about opting in)

1 Like
4

This is a good reason to have not gotten rid of polygon payments as those worked perfectly and cheap fees this zksync is just horrible and no one should even want to use it, and I still dont understand why you guys keep pushing zksync onto anyone.

2 Likes
5

i expected Era to NOT fallback anywhere, i wanted to choose only Zksync Era, and be held, if not payed, by choosing “operator.wallet-features: [“zksync-era”]” ehhh hate L1

1 Like
6

I consider polygon horrible :slight_smile:

I don’t remember details, don’t quote me on this, but IIRC Polygon is not a “true” L2 solution, but rather its own “side chain” (with its own security mechanisms). zkSync is an actual L2 scaling solution, that inherits Etherium security guarantees.

Polygon just has been created earlier, and thus has larger use base so far. zkSync seems to be much better scaling solution moving forward, not even a question.

Also, what’s up with having to hold matic at all times for transaction fees? It’ just silly.

1 Like
7

Ohhhh, this one would have been even better! Either pay how I request – or don’t pay at all.

But maybe storj does not want extra liability holding unpaid assets. Not that it’s a huge amount of money…

1 Like
8

polygon works though and is on pretty much all exchanges and zksync isnt. Usability for zksync is just horrible.
For security polygon is ahead of zksync and have already gone about getting regulations for it and has zksync done that I think no. Polygon is on every single major exchange, That includes ETH polygon as well.

zksync you have to hold eth to move it to L1 dont you? How many exchanges support zksync as of right now for storj pretty much zero.

9

It’s a matter of time. The only advantage polygon has is that it gained wider popularity by happening to be deployed earlier. That it.

“Ahead”? What does it mean? To use polygon I have to trust polygon. To use zksync I have to trust etherium. That’s not even a dilemma — why bring another entity into chain of trust if you don’t have to?

No, I don’t, why would I want to move to L1? The whole point of L2 is not to :). With polygon you have to pay minuscule amount of matic for every fart. Which means you have to keep couple of bucks there at all times. This is either malicious or simply horrible design.

One is enough. Why do you need 17 exchanges ? You are going to use one anyway….

2 Likes
10

zksync has had plenty of time. to be on exchanges its useless if its only on one exchange and if one doesnt use this to cash out there storj then its pointless to say theres one.

Trust what more trust is there with Eth there validators on both polygon and eth what exactly is the difference? You think either are immune to being hacked?

Id like to know how you manage to cash out zksync when you want to cash your storj in and it isnt free to do. Matic it cost 1cent to swap from one coin to another I dont see how this is malicious.

Yes one is enough if that is the one that you use and if you dont use it then you would need more then one right? Thats pretty obvious.

11

By “cash out” you mean fiat? I don’t do that. Why should I?

That’s you just saying words without explaining why. I’m exchanging storj to USDC on zigzag. It works just fine.

You can read whitepaper. I’m not going to explain it to you in a forum post better than it is already described in the documentation. Polygon is a side chain with ties in into etherium. Here is a short summary: blockchain - Is Polygon (Matic) a layer-2 or a sidechain? - Ethereum Stack Exchange

No, I have specified what that means in the previous comment.

I don’t “cash out”. I swaps storj to Usdc and then use that to buy gift cards or prepaid Mastercard cards. With Era you can now stay on zkSync the whole process.

I don’t understand what you mean, and hence, obviously, it’s not “pretty obvious”. What do you call “exchange”?

There is at least one exchange that works for storj on zkSync (zigzag). why do you insist on having more than one available?

12

Why not what is the point in holding it?

This doesnt give you a reason to trust one or the other.

So everything you said doesnt really mean anything either since you dont cash out your coins…

I have not seen this process as its not as easy to use and not user friendly, When it comes to polygon I can swap to USDC and send it to my exchange for 1 cent then I can put it on a debit card. Using zksync sounds so 2015 when people used crypto to buy giftcards to get around to using crypto legit, I like the idea of being legit and having a paper trail.

Yes if you have used the same exchange for 4 years and its earned your trust why would I want to switch to another exchange that I have to do more then one step if I want to use what I have earned? I have an exchange that I use to send my storj to then it goes either to my bank directly or to a debit card that I already have with the exchange.

13

Last month I received 28USD, this month 21 USD, so the real reduction is more closer to 25% than to 10%.

1 Like
14

No point. I’m not holding storj. I’m swapping it to Usdc and use that to pay for goods and services. I don’t have any use for cash.

I wrote this in literary the previous comment. If we are having a discussion, at least please read my responses.

Of course it does! Having reviewed both designs, my intuition and gut feeling makes me trust zksync more.

lol. And you call that easier? Cash? On debit card? Compared to paying for my cell phone with USDC directly?

“2015” is still clinging to cash and debit card and central exchange that knows everything about you and that is hard to change.

I’m not married to any exchange, I trust none, and use whatever convenient for me at the moment. I don’t have accounts at any, did not go though KYC at any, and only connect to them with a custodial wallet on my phone.

[quote=“deathlessdd, post:12, topic:23463”]
I have to do more then one step if I want to use what I have earned?
[/quote

You already do two extra steps - to cash and to debit card. I do none of them. I use what I earned by paying with it for goods and services. Directly. In crypto.

So you have put yourself into a position where you are tied to cash and therefore a specific exchange and bank, because cash requires KYC and now you are succumbing to a sunk cost fallacy. I didn’t and I haven’t and I don’t.

With recent payment I paid part of my AT&T wireless bill. In coins. Via BitPay. On AT&T web site. Without an account or KYC. I would never setup the workflow you are using - it’s too much work and tons of disclosures.

15

I don’t do any steps at the moment as i still get paid on layer 1. It was just an example if I was to get paid on polygon.

I don’t have time to spend looking at what exchanges support zksync to where i can use it, i’ve already done kyc so it makes zero difference to me if i continue to use it. I’m not looking to do anything illegal so why would i need to use zksync just so i don’t need to kyc, eventually kyc will be everywhere and there will be no way around it. So good luck keeping it going forever. Espically if you live in the states. If zksync works for you it doesn’t mean it works for everyone. I’m at a point where i want stuff that just works. I’m done fiddling around with crap that isn’t supported everywhere.

16

That’s the point. It “just works” for me. Going all other routes requires much more efforts.

By the way, this is irrespective to zksync vs polygon — you can adopt the same approach with polygon.

Nope. You don’t need KYC to pay someone for goods and services. Requiring KYC to sell me a pizza will kill all business.

Well, don’t set yourself impossible goal to have something supported everywhere. This will never happen. You just need for stuff to work now in one way. Zksync works.

But this is beyond the discussion of pros and cons of side chain scaling solutions.

17

Your right if zksync was support on the exchange that i use i would switch but right now since it’s not supported I don’t really wanna jump though hoops to get it sent to where i need it.

1 Like
18

No, you need STORJ tokens to pay fee. But you may select ETH too.

19

Is there a 10% bonus for zksync-era payouts?

20

I also thought zksync experience is great, but I see terrible liquidity these days on Zigzag exchange. Like Storj/USD* pair is 0.26 if you want to sell Storj, but other exchanges is close to 0.29 witch 1000x higher liquidity… Wonder how often I sold under value so much…