Ok. Then you - are 100% right. Their treats just to way to keep their costs low. Thanks. I just not a part of this group. And likely I’ll be unwelcomed despite the same language 
Storj do not treat like this anyone, I would say, it’s reverse - they treat anyone as a clear altruist and curios explorer.
It’s just my personal opinion. Please don’t forget - I’m not an employee, so I can share my own opinions. They might not match the company’s targets.
If I’m going speak as of a Storj representative, I’ll do so explicitly. If not - it will be always my personal opinion.
But thanks for reminding, I sometimes forget to add this disclaimer.
Reading this level of incompetence is just depressing.
I’m glad that you shared your opinion as a representative of this group, it’s pretty clear. Could you please share your goals more clearly to stop me to speculate?
I’m sorry, I just trying to summarize all posts from your group to have a more clear picture.
The answer was given in post 2.
It only depends on when you started and how many /24 nets you own. Anything else can be ignored. @Th3Van has a datacenter like setup while mine is closer to potatoe style but I see no difference in ingress per /24. We are both significanly down from our heights even without chapter 11.
Thank you for calling the people who have put hundreds of thousands of dollars of hardware and unpaid and qualified labor into this network terrorists.
People who bought additional equipment because we were told the network didn’t have enough capacity for the customers coming, and that Storj would otherwise have to build that capacity itself. People who invested hoping that in five years they might reach break-even and eventually see a small profit.
We are only saying we won’t run this at a loss. When the numbers go negative, we will stop. Because we are storage node operators, not donors, and we, same as Storj, do this for a profit.
Removing the /24 rule would at least give equal chance to all of us, not just give an unfair advantage to those who have access to cheap, unlimited IPs.
In my opinion, reduce storage cost to $1.25, repair egress to $1, and add that the first 500GB is unpaid on every node.
That would at least give equal chance for everyone.
Also, if I understand correctly, repair currently goes through the satellite. If possible, make it so that the satellite only coordinates the repair, but traffic flows between the nodes, so no extra cost on that for STORJ.
The idea behind repairs is that a node is no longer around with the missing pieces (or it has lost them). If a node had the info it needed to give to another node directly … you wouldn’t need the repair .
You need to download the minimum amount of pieces to reassemble everything… to then recreate what’s missing… then send those recreated pieces to new nodes. That needs a central service. And to make sure it’s done Storj probably wants to do that part themselves: they can’t trust random nodes to maybe hopefully occasionally eventually handle something they were asked to repair (and know it was done correctly).
As for the /24 rule: everyone already has an equal chance: or as close as you can get in this world . The nebulous group of shadowy people who purportedly have an “unfair advantage” now… also have the mountain of hardware needed to run the most nodes.
If you change the rules to benefit those who simply could run the most nodes… it would become less fair than today.
Don’t change rules. Don’t change requirements. Don’t change code. Just drop the payout rate by a bit.
People running in “industrial scale” are actually the people that have the technical knowledge, infrastructure and pockets to do so. These are the actual SNOs. Not the 1TB-usb-rpis. They are the ones that will fix an issue at 2am, not wait for 5 hours for a node offline email just to come search the forum and fix it the next day.
Being called a terrorist for simply saying that if math aint mathing (=I can’t pay out of my pocket in order for you(=storj inc) to run a for profit business) is outrageous. You should apologize for that.
This isn’t a situation the SNOs (the real ones, see above) got us into. It’s the multiple years of storj inc completely ignoring pretty much every single suggestion thrown their way and acting as if the company was on a continuous growing trajectory (even though it was pointed out dozens of times that that’s not the case).
And since we are on the “who’s to blame” track, when did we get from:
to a chapter 11? Did the “terrorists” rob your vault?
If you are crying about injustice now, then after the measures you proposed are implemented, you will be uncontrollably sobbing 
Mitsos, my man: did you read what you quoted?
When they posted back in Oct 2023 they had no plans to change payouts. That could change the very next day: but at the time I’m sure that was true. But if they needed to adjust they would.
And now they need to adjust. As documented. Right?
Roxor, my man: yes I did read what I quoted, which is why I quoted it.
“no further cuts unless necessary” —> “sorry, no money to pay, can we negotiate a better price?”
not the same as
“no further cuts unless necessary” —> “looks like we need to negotiate a better price because money is tight right now”
Ah, I didn’t understand, I apologize. When they said:
You’re saying that they are making changes “to maintain the health and performance of the network”… BUT… you aren’t in agreement with what they adjust, and how they’re doing it.
That they’re doing what they said… but you feel they’re not keeping with the spirit of that 2023 post?
That’s fair.
No, I’m saying that if the cuts were indeed necessary it should have been done some time between 2023 and 2026, not after the company files for a chapter 11.
I wonder if they regret the PetaGene/cunoFS and Valdi acquisitions: maybe that’s where the unservicable-levels-of-debt came from? You’re right this isn’t some surprise debt that jumped-out-of-the-bushes… so they could have dealt with it earlier.
It would be surprising: unless they way way overpaid. Turning cunoFS into Object Mount seemed like a no-brainer. And a GPU-rental company should be very profitable these days.
For Valdi they paid at least partially with tokens… 
About the “equal chance,” not exactly. I have more than 200TB of unused capacity, but I am not interested in dealing with 100+ VPSs, multiple VPS providers, and emailing them to put me in different subnets. I would rather spin up 1000+ nodes than deal with 10+ VPS providers and calculate the cost on those, etc.
I am not running an RPi; I have a Ryzen-based server with ECC RAM and a proper ASRock rack server board, a UPS. My uptime on this machine is over 400 days, and I could easily add more capacity.
In my opinion, at least a few SNOs are in the same situation.
Exactly. You have the same opportunity to deal with 100+ VPSs as anyone else. You choose to accept lower used-space and avoid those hassles. Lots of people make the same choice! Others, with the same opportunity, choose to deal with the extra IPs: and put in the extra work for higher payouts.
Equal opportunities. Not equal outcomes. People simply choose different paths.
You already have equal chance, today.