so again why? because i can (maybe)
why should people use it?
beacuse they want to and they like free stuff, but can they expect the same level of support? of course not, i only have so much time to spare, and i cant expect others to do the support part
and then in the end, it might end up as a partial competitor for storj and piss them off, and that is not my goal…
Maybe a good trade-off would be what I was thinking of here? Open discussion / ideas for updated tokenomics - #114 by Toyoo A cheaper, closer to tit-for-tat version, while still having Storj Inc. maintaining satellites, maybe doing some light support, and get paid for it.
Hosting satellites is expensive though. Storj had to introduce a per-segment fee at some point to discourage bloating satellite databases by many small segments.
The closest you can get to this is if you were doing this yourself for your own nodes, like what is called a private cloud.
For the fun of the learning experience, count me in as well. I’ve got a few TB in spare.
Agree - if this at any point evolves in that direction, I’m out.
Thought..
If this test-setup is based on zero economy for participation, the supply/demand would probably soon become unbalanced - what if the currency is based on 1:1 or even 1/2:1 shared storage equals what you would be able to put into the network? This would be an incentive to stay online and go it well.
Also - next to satellite resources, repair workers might be a resource hog as well?
As soon as you ofer free storage to everyone, someone will fill your storage in the first day with junk. Just to piss you off.
This project only makes sense for close circles.
Mostly a bandwidth, CPU usage shouldn’t be higher than with uplink (which is basically it), but since it does not encrypt/decrypt, the usage is expected to be lower.