[quote=“kevink, post:16, topic:14228”]
So if there were less nodes, you’d still get the same ratio of egress but you’d get more ingress and would have more data stored.
[/quote] - That statement is not true, because of “test data” majority of SNO income, the subsidy, HOWEVER - more data stored is more egress! so? thats the goal. less nodes with the same demand, more data on average on existinmg nodes, right? so average more profit for existing nodes, its all im talking here, do i?
no its not? i mean yes, but thats more complicated,
if theres more nodes then Storj “test data” which is subsidy basicly, has to reach to more nodes.
i pointed above, we cant control customers, but we can control new nodes inflow on and off.
of coruse the minuses of such managment would be it should be monitored carefully, because its a balance(!!!) beetween:
- paying nodes really good enough (i said more FAIR to theirs efforts, its resposible job i have nodes goin offline every couple of days for whatever reasons (for ex: ip operator domain fails) and i have to act)
and
2)having network capasity large, to take new big customers with no problem.
And the PROS would be as always, the more restricted something is, the more interest it gets. Again i did not invented this, Stroj started ON/OFF’ing new nodes long ago.
im not even talking about my own interestst now, at this moment, i dont care, because i cant expand anyway to profit, i have caped at my 07-0,9TB nodes, so i cant get more, (well i do care about subsidy traffic tho, would be nice to get more ofcourse) im talking from a projecting and managment perspective for whole system, im thinking out whats utlimatlivly better for the system as a whole.
Why its unfair, well from point of view of a node operator there is some FAIRNESS for effort he puts, just like stated above, im reminding You that i DID NOT invented new node registration halting, it was Stroj first so all im poiting is IF they decided to turn it On and OFF, because they stated they want balance, thats they should do it more carefully so i provided a feedback, they were to busy with developing part, its always the same, every part of the project has to speak up for theirs problems : if someone feels payments are too low or something isnt right in theirs view. (node operators, Customers, even devs should tell us when they have problems and ask for help if needed)
I remember not one “outrage” here we just speaked up and was listened by storj, storj is listening often its good for business they have to. We speaked up few times here at forum in the past and stroj saw that and we had our extra compenastions, and it was very fair, thats i why i like storj, but we have to speak UP for our selfs just communicate, im not hating anybody. You hating me. “How dare You to speak up, we don’t want rewards! for our effort” right?
Someone said 0,7TB disc space is unprofitable, then why allow it?
Storj said we can start from 500GB, yes/no?
If 0,7 TB is unproffitable then it is MINNING, (and storj stated its not minning) because only dedicated ppl will make nodes for profit, and as far as i know, the idea is for all the ppl who have minim 500GB free space to contribute? so pick one.
if its Not minning then 0,7TB disc space should be profitable.
and it is, just again, everyting as stated above, can be more, should be more.
A Year ago from 0,7TB i had 0,35 TB egress /mo, now its 0,09-0,19TB.
Why to making more children if You strugle to feed existing ones? all i am talking here, i will keep my nodes, but if situation stay the same i dont if i can stay above water.