Considering, this fact is not common, to be known to many SNOs.
There is kind of a discount (or more like a bonus) - if you pay for the usage in STORJ tokens, you will get 10% bonus to your account.
Well, then maybe it should be placed next to requirements?
Why? What is it would solve?
To attract SNOs? Apparently Storj does need them.
One thing is to say āyou canāt have less than 5 hours downtime per month, periodā, another āyeah, we accept some downtime if you have temporary problem, but you will be penalized with taking away some of the pieces you storeā.
Even if thatās true, I do not think that we need to reduce requirements here. At least this is the intention to have the node at least 99.3% of the time.
We already have nodes, which deviates here, so relaxing requirements would make the situation only worse. Yes, perhaps the Storj network can tolerate this, but with all proxy/VPN nodes it become even more important.
If the proxy/VPN nodes would be shutdown because of the HW issue, the downtime must be as short as possible.
1 Like
Maybe somebody else already asked this question.
Would it be possible to periodically post an updated table about the capacity targets (perhaps every 2 weeks) and its current state? Maybe its just me, but I would like to follow the progress.
1 Like
Iād expect the āUsed Capacity Saltlakeā ā Used Capacity report to track overall progress. Like weāre just under 5PB now and the table made it sound like they wanted to add another 19?
The table also says (5 days a go) that the current amount of data was 11PB. Somehow there is a mismatch of a few petabyte
Or is it the expansion factor??
The API says 12.4 PiB after expansion atm.
Yes that is possible. I might forget it from time to time but you are welcome to remind me.
Currently stored on SLC are 13 PB almost 13.5 PB. Rest of the numbers hasnāt changed.
5 Likes
Maybe I missed something, but of all the incentives, etc. discussed, was there any thought about increasing payouts to SNOs? The reduction in payments last year was quite drastic and reduced the incentive for SNOs.
3 Likes
Yes that question was raised internally. I am a storage node myself so I had to try it at least. The answer was the expected one. Higher payout rates would incentivice the wrong nodes. The nodes will either join the network with the current payout rate or not. With higher payout rates we only make it so that we shouldnāt sign these deals in the first place.
4 Likes
Yup, u missed a lot.
TL;DR: They think its a joke.
But all they have to do is to swap $2 and $1,5 places:
They will not rise anything, and will rise, at the same time!
A Final blow to the never ending discussions about the increase.
Seems like a Win-Win to me!
1 Like
If SNO pay goes from $1.50->$2ā¦ then the customer price has to bump around $4->$5.33 for Storj to remain in the black. How many clients will stick around with a 33% increase?
Remember that back when SNOs were getting paid moreā¦ Storj was losing money every month and making up for it with treasury tokens. Theyāre barely profitable now, and the remaining surplus tokens will only get us into 2025. They canāt raise customer prices since so many competitors are at/around $4/TB/mā¦ so thereās no extra money for SNOs.
SNOs are probably still overpaid today (like if they can grow the network to 30k nodes they should try offering $1.25/TB/m)ā¦ but I doubt weāll see any change to payouts the rest of 2024 
7 Likes
Actualy there could be a payout increase, because the RS numbers are lowered, so Storj makes more money, if those RS numbers are applyed for all sats. But I doubt that they will ever increase it. The payout/TB stored has a downward trend and will have the same trend in the future.
1 Like
That is impossible. The downside of the new RS numbers are increase repair costs. The only reason we can do it here is because of the low TTL.
2 Likes
My mistake than. I donāt have all the data.
So the future is per customer RS numbers? 
So You say $2/TB storage is totally possible if almost all data will be TTL like that? Got it! 
Yea but repair cost also goes down after swap so? 
so You choose endless pain discussion? Very well, till next time!
