Update Proposal for Storage Node Operators

I don’t have to show you anything, you have to show me potential customers for your proposed pricing.
We both agree that bandwidth for nodes is “free” and because of that have to compete on bandwidth. I think one group could be backup users and proposed a price, you think that it is Steam selling ARK and proposed a price.
That does not mean that a single game like ARK creates 1’126’400$ (if we use your proposed 2$ per TB) worth of bandwidth. But yeah, maybe you are right, and ARK really used one of your listed CDN for 0.02$ per GB. That would be 20$ per TB or 11 million $ for ARK. Do you think it is realistic that ARK (or steam) paid 11m $ for bandwidth to deliver ARK?

Latency also does not matter much for video, clients have cache. Sure I don’t wanna wait 20s after I clicked a video, but up 3s is fine by me.

Really makes you wonder why customers choose otherwise, doesn’t it? :wink:
As we have discussed before, customers are just too stupid to realize that they can get a product equal if not better than AWS S3, for 80% cheaper! /s