Gracefull exit successfully - now Goodbye!

1 Like

always know stuff makes good sense when it requires a manual xD
that only leads me to more questions… i mean… then why is there only him…
if he isn’t staff, then wouldn’t there be more like him…

or is he simply a storj pet project

ofc having multiple leaders would also be kinda confusing, but i guess it just means that he is the top tier moderator on the forum…

still i think the word is utilized in a very weird use case… doesn’t make any sense.
without a manual…

i can see the argument for using it, but i will never agree that it’s the right word to use in this regard, even tho i sort of understood what it was suppose to mean…

it does put alexey a bit in an unfortunate position when trying to educate about storj profits… difficult to be a step before the payroll and then be promoting without bias.

1 Like

Its not just him there are others but he’s the one that is more active.

Source: https://storj.io/team/

You should contact Discourse support.

2 Likes

Thank you, I’m agree with you!
I edited my posts to add some warnings as well. This is was not suggestion, this is was my experience and opinion. I shared my experience and opinion not as a Leader, but as a SNO :slight_smile:

But you are right, it could be read as suggestion, so I modified them to point out, that it was an experiment and it was successful, but it doesn’t mean that it would be so for everyone.

7 Likes

I don’t think we need to tip toe around sharing our own experience or pretend that it’s a complete gamble. Past performance is definitely an indication of what the future may hold. It’s no guarantee of course, but to pretend it’s not even an indication is just naive.

After being a node operator since February 2019, I’ve seen a trend of growing traffic over time. I’ve started out with the attitude of not wanting to invest anything at all, but I’ve seen enough to know some small investments could definitely be profitable. So while I agree that something needs to be done about the earnings estimator as that sets the wrong expectations. I think it’s nonsense to pretend like you’re buying lottery tickets here. There are good estimates out there for what you might earn. And yes every investment is a risk, but with the right information Storj is a manageable risk, with a fairly reliable reward at the other end.

I understand that storj mostly tells you to not invest in new hardware. I don’t want to tell you what to do at all. I’d prefer to just give everyone the best information available, which includes past experiences from node operators, and then let you make your own decision.

I don’t think there was anything wrong with @Alexey’s message. He just shared his own experience. In fact I think it was even a fairly modest example, considering that my node has made over $1000 already. Even if you remove the surge payouts from that, for many people that would warrant some upfront investments. In my opinion it’s a moderate risk investment with a high likelihood of a positive return. But you have to be well informed about what to expect to decide what level of investment is worth it.

It pains me to see people build expensive servers with overkill hardware. Truth is storj doesn’t need a lot and is probably best run on NAS hardware or RPi like systems. I guess cheap second hand hardware could work too as long as it’s easy on the power use. If you stick to that and don’t overspend, it’ll almost certainly be profitable. But you’re not going to get rich! It’s a fair compensation for the service you provide.

5 Likes

Those are fair statements, however, I think the heart of the issue is setting initial SNO expectations which starts with the catch phrase “Put your extra space to use and start earning today.” It makes it sound as if you will get paid for any free disk space casually. The fact is the most difficult aspect of being an SNO is the uptime requirements at all levels from power, to network to 24x7 HDD usage. I suspect most potential SNOs don’t really take into consideration the requirement to have less than 5 hours of downtime a month, factoring in not just powering their rigs but anything that can go wrong along the way from software to OS to hardware issues. And you have to remember they are not thinking of this having a duration of 15 months or more, but of payouts happening within a month or so.

To me that says use what you already have. People are too obsessed with the uptime requirement. We already know that’s going to change and there will be a suspension you can recover from before permanent disqualification. Besides it hasn’t even been enforced for many months now. Uptime will be fine for most. Even in a bad month with power outages and internet being down sometimes. The system being built right now is meant to give warnings and allow for time to correct issues.

3 Likes

3 posts were merged into an existing topic: Storage drive health status as part of dashboard

@BrightSilence
I agree with the vision that there should and will be some sort of uptime requirement.
It is a decision that should not be taken lightly, if too strict the home users will get disqualified eventually, and that is not good for the network

It has also been correctly stated that most of the storage that will come from customers is likely to be cold or warm backup data, so who cares if a node is offline for a prolonged period of time as long as there are enough nodes online.

How will you make sure enough nodes are online ?

sure, that is one variable, but the system is set up in a way that 10% of the nodes temporarily offline is not a problem, so for the individual SNO a week offline due to hardware problems / ISP issues etc. should not be a problem.

But again, for cold or warm backup storage, a week offline is not an issue as long as the node comes back to the network eventually.

Are there actually probabilistic models telling us that a certain downtime leads to guaranteed availability and levels of performance?

You can’t risk a file being temporarily unavailable because you can never know whether the nodes will come back online. Besides, Tardigrade offers hot object storage. The trade off really isn’t between uptime requirements and file availability, but between uptime requirements and repair costs. Since risking the file being unavailable means you’re also risking the file being permanently lost, that’s not an option at all. So Storj will have to trigger repair before that happens. Which means nodes that are often offline cost them more than they bring in money. And for obvious reasons they want to get rid of nodes that provide a net negative profit. Let’s just wait and see what the new rules will be, but from what I’ve heard they will be quite reasonable. Honestly, I’ll probably miss the repair ingress more than I’ll worry about my node not keeping up with the requirements.

1 Like

This long discussion was a very informative one :slight_smile:
Lot of opinions and numbers and facts.

Ill still put my faith in storj.
I’m running my node in server hardware. I’m checking the numbers, keeping it up 99.99% (I still depend on ISP…) and if I like the next month on how everything looks, I will jump from 12TB to 98TB.

I still dont know if its good to keep 1 node, or add more. I see that most people have several nodes.

As of now (last couple of months) there is a cap on how much data can one node receive per day (because that’s how the simulation data is structured)
Last two weeks intake stream was ~120GB/day - what doesn’t mean that the number can jump up or down (as it is doing right now - 20% of last weeks stream)
So you have to calculate how long will it take to fill up 100TB of space, or is it worth it to keep it empty/powered, or maybe gradually expand.

An if you are able to spread the disks to many remote IP’s then it will multiply your intake streams.