I understand why Storj has the position it has on this topic. My question was not directed to you or seeking some company opinion, it was meant in the sense “you” like, “one”, any one indeterminate person, which I thought was clear when I added “Now each person, in their own mind, can answer…”. Obviously it was not clear and I should have used a clear disclaimer. I apologize for broaching this controversial subject and hope I did not confuse anyone. My statements were purely based on my own thoughts and not on any fact, information, connection to Storj or anyone working, employed by, contracting, involved financially or otherwise with Storj; they were my own thoughts and were not meant to inform, advise, incite any action nor otherwise appear as statement of facts.
Please do remove my posts on this topic and any references to it if it helps in any way.
Indeed. But if they keep saying 60% is ok on the forum, and they “refresh” the requirements without changing this specific item, then this is confusing.
There is a difference between requirement and enforcement. I don’t see much of an issue with that. If they communicate that 60% is fine, you’re going to have people just turn their nodes off during the night because of noise. The requirement makes it clear that’s not okay. At the same time they don’t want to suspend nodes for temporary unavoidable issues or extensive maintenance.
At what point has there ever been a shortage of storagenodes?
At what point has there ever been a lack of storagenode disk space?
Did I miss something?
Sounds like you’ve missed quite a bit.
In the midst of that stream of consciousness that now is the “Updates on Test Data” thread is also this nugget of information from LittleSkunk regarding network expansion and surge plans.
I would like to recommend not tagging devs with @ and just mention their name instead. So they don’t get unnecessary notifications.
Yes, you are absolutely right. I had already read this advice but forgot.
My apologies.
But when a Node is fast?
By winning 99% races? 90%? 50%?
Yes this is per month. We will work on updating the docs.
The biggest concern I have when thinking of expanding my nodes farm, is the payout per TB stored. The growth plan is pretty sweet, but ROI is still not great for a brand new system. It’s OK now and I can work with it, if I was assured that no payout reduction will hit us 3-5 years from now.
But I’m pretty sure once the network will grow at a level of 2x or 3x the demand, and the demand reach a stall point, a new cut in our price/TB will be imposed. So I’m forced to use a 1$/TB ratio (a best case scenario) for a 5 year investment. Which it’s not great at all, and limits drastically what I could buy.
Yeah there are some time constraints that are hard to get around. Since a HDD can only make so much when full (knowing egress is always low)… then if it was originally going to pay for itself in 2.5-3 years… maybe a fast-fill-rate lowers that to 2 years or something. But that still means you spend most of the time full… watching paint dry as you creep towards break-even. Adding more drives doesn’t make it any faster: they each have to pass that time.
But adding more drives does mean after those 2 years more coins are coming in every month. So there’s still a reward if you can afford to expand-on-demand.
We’re still enjoying massive amounts of test data: so it’s easy to remain optimistic. But a month from now when we’ve reached reserved-capacity targets and are coasting again… we’ll see how people feel. I’m still going to add a disk every time I fill one! 
Of course, if there are more payout cutouts without a reasonable notice, many large farmers could shutdown operations and the signed contracts with these “customers” we still don’t know could be compromised. Surely there will be a balance 
I’m not a big fan of this hype due massive test data flow. Ingress is not paid and stored data is deleted every month (=> you are paid in average half the maximum data u can store in a month). Basically they could double the capacity of the network paying the same to SNOs.
That’s just for the first month. After that, as old file is deleted, a new one is uploaded, so you will get paid for the full space used.
Let’s see. After first month I saw huge chuncks of data moved to trash.
not trash. directly deleted. you are going to see hdd working hard… nothing more
8 posts were split to a new topic: Further discussions on IPv6
Just noticied that someone removed IPv6 topic from this discussion to separate in another, although that has everything to do with Storj Growth, but at the same time doesn’t seems to please some to discuss it.
It may not be the main topic for Storj Growth but has to do. In order to not extend this topic further here just want to leave a note that full IPv6 support has everything to do with Storj Growth being a highly Internet dependend project.
Akamai’s report on IPv6 in their network (from 2022)
https://www.akamai.com/blog/trends/10-years-since-world-ipv6-launch
According to this report, there might be some performance improvements in using IPv6 compared to IPv4
Th3Van.dk
At the cost of pieces being moved to other nodes. So it’s not like they’d do that if they want to actually have any decent revenue.