Again I recommend that we just test it in testnet. I am down to it. We can open a topic here in the forum and just exchange some tokens in testnet until everyone feels comfortable using it.
3 Likes
ETA, adding some comments from engineering 
:
a prerequisite for sending anyone zksync is that they opt in. we’re going to have the ability for SNOs to opt in on the dashboard of the payouts that happen in march, according to the rollout and viktor’s timeline.
for anyone wants to try sooner… if we can collect a list of wallet addresses of people who want to try zksync in february, that would be sufficient for a test
So is anyone here interested in being involved with that initial testing?
3 Likes
I am interested
there are a couple of small nodes that are just filling up.
I would be curious to see what the Fees would be from L2 back to L1
3 Likes
me too. I havent started testing it myself, but it’s a matter of interest for us all.
1 Like
Today I sent a email to support for the idea for migrating to Cardano blockchain. They have a ERC20 converter, so there is a easy way to migrate. Payments are very fast. This feature will be available in the 1st quarter. Project: https://cardano.org/
3 Likes
We do not plan to migrate to another blockchain again.
3 Likes
I like the idea in principle, but the fees to withdraw back to L1 are worrisome.
On the Zksynk explorer, most withdrawals have fees around 0.005 to 0.020 ETH (~$5-22).
For example, this one (picked at random) paid a fee of 0.00658 ETH ($7.5). The matching transaction in L1 is this one, which was executed with a gas price of 57 gwei, which means at that time the L1 fee was around $1.35 (ETH transfer, 21000 gas, so slightly higher for tokens).
Could this be doing more harm than good?
4 Likes
Feels to me like using a blockchain (with wallet and cyrpto notions) was already quite complicated for lambda users.
But having 2 layers now?! I don’t even understand what it means, it’s gonna need some reading for me to get what it’s all about… and what magic could make fees lower even though it’s still on the ETH blockchain? 
If we can stay on the standard STORJ token, I think I’ll stay on this for now, even though I might not get paid every month (I did no get paid this month indeed).
3 Likes
Ok, so I’m going to attempt a sort of simple description as I understand it, but please correct me if I’m wrong.
This method will save a lot of costs by splitting up transactions in 2 steps. The first step is where Storj would initiate the payout and publish a list of payouts to all nodes in a special way on the ethereum blockchain. Instead of doing this in all separate transactions, this can be done in a more efficient way saving the majority of transaction costs. SNOs can then initiate the second part of that transaction by actually moving those tokens to a L1 address again. However, that’s a bit more complicated of an operation than a normal token transfer, so that transaction would cost a little more to the node operator. This may seem like it just shifts the cost to the node operator, but that’s not entirely accurate if you consider that most SNO’s probably don’t transfer out their earnings every month. So if you only perform this transfer from L2 to L1 once every few months, the total transaction costs would be lower.
I can see 2 possible hurdles with this:
- Added complexity for node operators
- Higher transaction costs for node operators
Of course the upsides:
- No (or low) minimum payout thresholds
- Possibly more frequent payouts
I think these tradeoffs are reasonable to a lot of node operators. But for someone like me who is likely going to get $70+ payouts most months and won’t hit the payout threshold (unless costs get even more crazy), the selfish choice would still be to not opt for zksync to avoid the added transaction cost on my end. Of course with this alternative being an option it might be reasonable to only do traditional payouts when costs are an even lower (than 25%) percentage of the payout amount. Both to lower costs and encourage SNOs to switch. Just thinking out loud here.
Please correct me if any of this isn’t correct. I haven’t had much time to read up on this yet, so I’m partially just trying to learn by summarizing what I think I understand.
7 Likes
I managed to get my zkSync wallet setup in testnet. Please join me and we can figure out how to send our balance to an exchange. Test zkSync with TestSTORJ token
3 Likes
Will it be available for the Exodus wallet soon?
1 Like
This is up to the developers at Exodus to support it in app. You should message them.
Seems too complicated to me. I would vote no it that was possible.
Has the team looked into how Nicehash accomplished no transaction fees for their uses with a local Nicehash wallet and a Coinbase.com account? Their approach is super easy and fast.
2 Likes
Can you explain why more frequent payouts is good? It just means more paper work for tax accounting. And until payment notification with exchange price info happens more time checking to see if I have been paid.
1 Like
It is not. Give me your wallet and I will send you some TestSTORJ. Try it out. It is actually very easy to use.
How about SNOs not wanting to opt in… could the payout interval be lowered to once a quarter or ever longer to counter act the high fees at the moment?
To be honest, I’m not to keen on yet another crypto environment to understand. It’s hard enough to understand how eth works and how much gas (not sure I even understand gas) should be fueled before someone wants to drive my transactions. 
Last time I tried to use Storj tokens to pay for tardigrade, I ended up loosing a refund for too much payed, because Storj/tardigrade and the transaction provider kept pointing at each other. I am aure I’m not the only one having trouble understanding these terms and pitfalls.
UPDATE: I’ve been away from the forum for a week or so (too busy at work), and I see that you’ve already announced such a change to payments, however - I would still support a 3 month payment interval even though my payments FAR exceeds the 25% minimum fee. This would also increase profitability, and I’m sure many long term SNOs like myself wouldn’t mind these long intervals. Personally I don’t spend the tokens right away, and as such it’s more of a matter of us trusting you as a business to complete the payments rather than when they are sent.
10 Likes
It seems difficult to understand.
You have to read a lot.
It doesn’t seem like a good option to me. The commissions between L2 seem small.
Commissions from L2 to L1 seem high.
You can be a problem if you want to spend a small amount to eschage, to exchange for another crypto or to fiat.
I don’t like the storj token. It does not have a stable price. It goes up and down a lot every few days. I prefer to move to another more stable crypto.
2 Likes
Actually, as I see it, I’d love to see the intervals shorter while keeping some feasibility conditions (like maybe the 25% criterium). For example, every week Storj checks for which SNO wallets the transfer is feasible.
So instead of waiting one more month for the payment, with a bit of luck (gas costs going down) the payment would come just one week later.
Because as of now, to spend the earned tokens I’d have to make another transfer anyway, and if at some point the transfer is not feasible for Storj, why would it be feasible to me?
Less frequent payments is ok by me also. I was lucky as I received my payment Jan 9 for December when the fee was 10% of the payment amount. I too am not keen on taking the needed time to understand Zksync and will not opt-in and will likely opt-out if it become permanent. I have been with Storj for a long time and am looking forward to adding more nodes once my latest node, 10TBs, fills up (which will likely take months at the current ingress rate).
Please keep the solution simple.
3 Likes