For home users: low power nas, that users run 24/7 anyway to host music, media, and backups.
For SMB users: server in the closet with extra space that runs 24/7 anyway
Datacenters: unused capacity, that they run 24/7 anyway…
There is initial cost of installing and configuring the node, but then the recurring cost is zero.
Thank you for sharing your response and your plans to demonstrate your dissatisfaction with the payout rate on the network. We appreciate the open dialog and we don’t want to cause any action that will damage our relationship with the node community, the reputation of the network in the market or the durability, availability or performance of customer data.
We are reviewing the comments in this post as well as this recent post and will provide some feedback soon.
John Gleeson
Storj COO
A: Throughout this process we are committed to maintaining relatively stable aggregate SNO payouts through the addition of data and egress to the network. We plan to do this through our regular customer growth and also through the use of synthetic load (test data and egress that Storj does) if necessary. Given the relatively small egress and repair loads on these non-production satellites we will not be adding any additional synthetic load at this time, but will consider this option if changes are made in the future that have a more material impact on payouts.
Q: If Storj wants to save costs, why would it add synthetic load?
A: While adding synthetic load to the network does add cost It is important to note that right now our main concern is our unit costs. Our objective is to get to the point where every TB of data that we sell earns us money instead of losing us money like it does now. This is why we need to make changes to the SNO payments (as well as to R/S numbers, etc.) Once we are unit profitable then as we scale we become more profitable overall instead of less. Also, we plan to increase the synthetic load in step with any payout decreases such that the total amount we pay SNOs remains relatively constant. This means that overall the addition won’t increase our costs. It will just keep them flat until customer growth catches up.
This isn’t a promise though it was a way to help sno and they did that. If there’s no customers there’s no data… When storagenodes keep getting added to the network to take advantage of more income data that hurts the network even more.
Sigh… you already have disks and other equipment for other reasons, and you run the servers for other reasons. If you don’t – then you should not run storage node.
Lol. Are you joking? The “load” is absolutely superficial. There is barely few MBps of random IO. Your array, that is designed to support your other activities should not notice it. If you see significant load from a storage node – well, don’t run in on a potato.
I will never bother with GE myself. I run multiple small nodes. If I need space back – I just rm -rf as many nodes as needed to reclaim enough space.
I don’t know what you are talking about. I don’t administer my nodes. They simply run. If I did report a few bugs – it’s because of my curiosity and desire to do so. I did not have to. The very first node I started over a year ago runs without me touching it ever. So do all other services on my small home server. Maybe your hardware and connectivity is crap if it demands so much attention? Hardly a storj problem.
I don’t see it this way. I see that some company pays me for nothing. I’ll take it. I’m not on the board of directors of said company so it’s none of my business to dictate them how to run a business. I get free money. Why would I ever complain?
Please don’t allow vocal minority of users with unreasonable expectations bully you to short term decisions to the detriment of the company future. I personally feel even the new payout is too generous.
People are trying to get rich quick and don’t understand that if the compensation could pay for hardware and resources + profit, storj would not need them in the first place, it will run their own datacenter, like backblaze, that charges more, and is still not profitable.
This conversation goes in circles and utterly pointless.
Well, i do not “work” here. I VOLUNTEER. Im an SNO with 2 nodes , same subnet.
I express concerns without holding data hostage. Or cheating.
I even spend money
(around 730€,until today, i dont mind realy, i love hardware, i never expect it back. maybe real slowly)
and precious time,
(wich i have not much as father of 2, And is more worth than anything storj can give me in return.)
to storJ.
Because i like the whole idea and see the potential.
If your welbeeing is concerned because of some cents, just GE, sell the hardware. Concern gone.
Just go away from the thinking of “im not getting payd equaly, i will form an union/protest”
Its at best “the worst case zenario to test storj network durability”
MyOpinion* Sounds a bit brainwashed. 
* But it is what it is.
I’m not happy that decisions about demotion are made too often and too quickly from the announcement date. I expect something more predictable in the style of “we will reduce payments in half a year or a year”
P.S. I will support strike.
with free white IP
1Tb and 2$/month? strange SMB… maybe dishonest admin, not owner. 100Tb and 200$/month? Well, that would be a very strange SMB with free 100Tb for nothing…
yeah, datacenters are exactly those who are very interested in becoming part of a network that pays all SNO together less than $100k per month)))
A lot of home users have public IPs. A lot of other users have access to free oracle VPS. So, I don’t see the problem. Yes, it can’t be used by any grandma, but it does not need to be.
I’m not even an SMB, an average home sno, I have 40TB free on my ancient home server. I don’t see why SMBs won’t have more. Disks are ultra cheap on a secondary markets. And nobody buys hardware for today’s needs, you always buy more. Hence, there is always unused capacity. Especially if you use the system for work (e.g. video production, science, etc)
It is 100k/month vs 0. You can hire an extra admin to stare at a storj dashboard and make $50k/month profit. You also get to write marketing materials that you are contributing to green projects. Value of this perhaps far exceeds 100k.
Lol. That is, you propose to transfer 50% of the entire network to one DC, for which this is just “free space”. It’s very decentralized and reliable. Oh yes, this will also mean that 2.7(Reed-Solomon)/2… Oh shiiiiit…)))
Oh, wait… So we’re talking about “just free space”? Or are we talking about purchasing separate equipment for money specifically for STORJ?
The problem with this mentality is that Storj isn’t a “get in, get out” kind of business in the way that something like a proof-of-work crypto is, where you can just switch to a different coin if the one you’re mining becomes unprofitable. It takes a very long time to fill up high capacity nodes, and you’re not paid anything for the ingress necessary to do so.
What I don’t like is the part where they sucker you in with high payouts (remember when egress was $20/TB?), then repeatedly lower the rates before you can earn anything. It feels like they’re banking on the fact that people have already paid the setup cost (whether that’s equipment or time). Now, a lot of SNOs are in limbo, where the payout rate is low enough that we never would have started had we known the rates would get this low, but it also doesn’t make sense to shut it down (yet).
I don’t know what you are talking about. I responded to this your statement
to explain why even big datacenter may be interested in running nodes.
I don’t know how did you turn that to this:
If datacenter want’s to run nodes – what’s the problem? How does it affect decentralization? You will have many datacenter across the world, it’s great. To have your data stored at amazon at jut two locations you have to pay double. Storj customers get better decentralization for free.
I don’t see a problem.
All SNOs of the world together get about $100k/month, if you look at payout blockchain address. So, to get $50k of them you need to “own” about 50% of all network. Just math, nothing complicated.
I already understood this, and apparently an ophthalmologist is needed here, and I’m just an engineer, sorry.
Thank you for listening to us, we look forward to constructive suggestions from you and your team!
You should be doing this sooner, the chance to make them feel your absence wanes with time.
Two weeks time is too much, they just crank-up the repair process to increase the healthy pieces average.
Absolutely right! At first you work for years, buy hardware, and then they tell you “tomorrow there are new tariffs, if you don’t like it, get out, the door is there.”
You may have noticed that disks in the NAS are being parked when there is no activity, and users are accessing them for a maximum of 3-4 hours a day. When the NAS is running storj, it utilizes the disks 100% of the time, which means that the electricity costs increase.
This is not free money; you once bought the equipment, spending your hard-earned money on it. The equipment has a finite resource. And storj increases the workload on it. This means that in the future, you will have to spend money again on equipment.
It is logical that operators want to make money. If you do not value your time and your equipment, letting storj labs profit from you, then you are foolish. And if you do not spend your time tracking the node’s work, you are a bad node with a high probability of losing user data. Responsible operators do everything possible to make their node reliable, using backup power and backup internet.
There are those who want to help develop the project, making it reliable for users, and there are those who are indifferent to the future (set it up and forget about it).
Any work should be paid.
The goal is not to harm the project but to be heard. If the management does not listen, it is a degradation. If they boldly decided to cut payouts without discussing it, causing some operators to incur losses, then it is practically the only chance to try to be heard.