Commodity storage with a conventional centralized model is much easier to sell, much easier to adopt, and fits far more boring mainstream workloads. So faster raw-PB growth there is expected.
This does not mean storj is underperforming. That comparison highlights thats the conventional storage is easier to buy: lower cognitive load, easier fit into existing assumptions, and benefits and drawbacks are standard and expected.
Storj first has to explain both why the architecture is different and why that difference is an advantage, while also overcoming the human fear of the unfamiliar and bandwagon pull toward the conventional option.
So woudl not compare storj to wasabi. I would compare storj to storj a year prior. Is there growth? Great.
PS. I would not use a company like Wasabi as benchmark of anything let alone something to aspire to. Their offering is a minefield of fineprint kung-fu, and I feel most of their business comes from people not reading or understanding it until itās too late and cost has been sunk.
It is true that there are changes that have happened at Storj. This is often the case after an acquisition where roles and responsibilities shift and teams are being integrated.
2 Exabytes onboarded data in 2023 still seems much more than what is on Storj today.
I donāt agree with that. There is massive amounts of data looking for storage options worldwide. They are just not getting stored on Storj services. Storj is underperforming. Thatās why old owners sold the company and probably why old CEO is no longer.
When the acquisition was announced, it was explicitly stated that
And now it seems that there is already a new Storj CEO but nothing but complete silence from Storj. At least, I couldnāt find any public announcement about the personnel changes that took place. Not even a public statement in which Storj thanked its former CRO and CEO after he was appointed as Ben Golubās successor amid much praise.
It just looks very weird.
There is a problem with the filecoin numbers. How much of that data is real customer data vs just garbage? With a full drive you get more coins so it makes sense to feed your own drive to the last byte and since the reward is higher than the costs all the nodes are doing exactly that. They fill their drives to the last byte with random garbage.
Iām not saying that you are mistaken, but how stored data in a cloud is cheaper than the space acquired from providers? Dosenāt produce a negative balance? Iām not familiar with Filecoin service, so there may be something I didnāt understood.
It works with a block reward. New coins are getting created. Imagin storj would print new tokens at the end of each month to cover the payout. No negative balance but a high inflation.
Iām speechless. Granted, I did not look long and hard into filecoin ā which looks to me to be more of a marketplace and settlement entity rather than storage provider in the first place ā but if such shenanigans are possible ā itās not even worth a discussion, itās just bonkers.
If we are coming to this conclusion it would be time to thoroughly assess what the management failures are or were causing the big growth happening at the competition not at Storj. Storj has great products in a great market environment in terms of there is massive demand for AI compute and for storage for AI but also generally. In Germany we are reading it every day how companies and government are looking for cloud solutions. Thanks to the current White House guy, American solutions are frowned upon and German resp. European data sovereignity gets more important.
The key questions are:
Why is Storj not sitting on Exabytes of stored data after more than 10 years in an evironment where data creation and storage and cloud usage is exploding worldwide?
I read about filecoin. Itās a jaw droppingly reckless bullshit nobody shall be using.
See the hardware requirements for their providers? What the hell is that? And you know why? Becuse they ducking verify every sector every 24 hours and send cryptographic proofs. The hell?!
Just realize absurdity: if the protocol verifies every sector constantly, it already assumes providers will fail, which means the real durability mechanism is fallback and recovery. Once that is true, forcing nonstop per-provider proof generation is not necessary, it is an expensive architectural choice that burns absurd amounts of compute and power to solve the wrong problem. Itās just bonkers. Holly Molly. And people want to pay for this? I donāt believe that. I feel most of their storage is fake. People cannot be that reckless. I feel second hand embarrassment for them.
They still donāt have a repair mechanism. Redundancy is provided through replication, and this isnāt a default setting; the client must set it manually. But there was a lot of hype around them, and itās just mining.
Because everybody associate us with a crypto/blockchain product, and nobody does the research to understand it. We lack the SOC and whatever for global network, we donāt offer a direct to personal user service and we lack an agressive market strategy. You see Storj mentioned only from time to time on some small blogs and at some world forgotten events.
We need all of these turned around 180 degrees and even a rebranding, to get rid of crypto stigma, and get rid of useless token payments for both sides, sno and clients.
Even the pronunciation got worse, with a āface palmā choise of sounds; storage made sense, storjay is just ā¦. I stopped myself to not get banned. Maybe the old leadership realy deserved to go away.
I actually still pronounce it as storage , because my native is Russian, for me more natural to pronounce it like āStorzhā, which sounds close enough to āstorageā.
$Filecoin price today is at $0.97 with 1.95B total supply, 772M circulating
$STORJ price is at $0.10 with 425M total supply, 425Mm circulating
Yes, letās assume thatās all correct and not dispute that Storj has superior tech.
But - according to their data - the competitors are the ones that have Exabytes of customer data stored. Not Storj.
So who trumps who?
Maybe these kind of of comments are the perfect example for the Storj problem? To have the focus rather on technical or niche details than on how to grow the customer base. This is not unique to Storj. We know from research on tech startups that this is a common failure: Excellent tech but horrible management and marketing.
Yes, maybe Wasabi, Backblaze, Filecoin are worse to store data on. But they are the ones that are sitting on Exabytes of paid data not Storj.
Perry Offer exemplifies visionary leadership, inspiring success by simplifying operations and fostering resilience, clarity, and focus in modern businesses.
Maybe the right person with the right mindset:
Analyse, is the idea still a good one? If so then it is the methodology that needs changing, probably simplifying.
lol its not they sold the company, lol, after 10 years they exhausted own ability and realized that to achieve more You have to be a part of the Bigr Guys club so they did just that.
i miss a Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 reports tho, they were great summary of constant Growth.
And Yeah i would love to hear from @john@Knowledge@jtolio
āguys! guys! we gonna do this now, we gonna do that nowā etc.
The community needs some fuel.
This is the root of the issue, and I completely agree. Everyone knows about backblaze and wasabi in spite of their shenanigans, they are the default go-to and get customers. Storj did not reach a tipping point. This is a marketing problem, because the tech is outstanding.
I pronounce storj like [storŹ], not [stÉɹdŹeÉŖ], Microsoft as [mŹ²ÉŖkroĖsÉft], not [ĖmaÉŖkɹÉĖsÉft], BMW as [bÉmĖvÉ], not [ĖbiĖÉmĖviĖ], let alone [ĖbiĖÉmĖdŹbÉljuĖ], and zebra as [ĖzŹ²ebrÉ], not [ĖziĖbɹÉ]. And I donāt care what brand owners think, they are not an authority to me in how to use language. So if stor-jay want to say the word in roundabout way ā they can. That does not mean anyone else should feel compelled to, and I specifically definitely wonāt. And besides, its whole point was a pun on the word āstorageā, not some ornithology reference.
, because my native is Russian, for me more natural to pronounce it like āStorzhā, which sounds close enough to āstorageā.