Will the fees accrue over time? IE I add a file today and then next year, the storage fee next year will be based on the one I added today? If thats the case then how much data are you able to store before fees stack up to say $10 per megabyte where it becomes unviable.. and in that case where one becomes dependent on the technology what would that person or entity do since they cost of doing business is not sustainable? Move to another private key, losing your initial data?
If fees don't accrue over time then my point of data storage usage outpacing technology is still valid.. what I meant by that was that the use of the data storage will outweigh the decrease in cost of storage space and the blockchain will fast hit a point where many people will not be able to or want to use it because of the bloat. This is because people will store things on the block chain and over time the blockchain will grow exponentially with the user base while the size of hard drives and speed of internet connections do not keep up to justify the increases in the blockchain.
The white paper says:
"Decentralized Data Storage and Retrieval
Syscoin provides services which enable users to store, and later retrieve, any data
which they wish to directly on the Syscoin blockchain. Up to 256KB of data may be stored per Syscoin setdata transaction. However, an arbitrary number of setdata transactions may be performed in order to store the desired amount of content on the Syscoin blockchain; the user is only limited by the amount of fees they can afford to pay. The data may subsequently be retrieved by the storer or anyone else using Syscoin's 'getdata' command along with the transaction ID of the correspondent 'setdata' transaction."
So I guess that means that the fees will be based on the number of tx you use... and the fee increases for you. I hope the fee doesn't increase for everyone else if they add their 256k in that same block?
So you have a block size where N users can add up to 256k per transaction and the number of transactions X can increase up to where fee Y increases for block Z. If user A can see user B's set data, then we have a possible huge block size. If not then you have fee Y increasing as a variable of X and Z. Still need to confirm that fees dont accrue once block Z is over, and if thats the case then bloat is possibly a show stopper?
Fees do not accrue over time. Fees to store data using 'setdata' are one-time fees.
Yes, this does create a situation where a large blockchain will be created because of the nature of its usage. However, this fact is offset by a few things:
1. the fact that those who are most likely to expend the capital to host the blockchain (mining pools) are also those who stand to profit from its additional revenue, and
2. that we are planning on implementing features which will allow for the deployment of thin, albeit more feature-limited wallets which will not require syncing the entire Syscoin blockchain for the most common currency transfer transactions.
3. we are actively working on some new designs which will help mitigate and discourage service abuse. I can't give you any info on that yet, but I can promise that such features will be exposed to through community review before I write a line of code to implement them.
What that means for those that use these wallets, however, is that they'll need to transfer their Syscoin to a service which does host the entire blockchain while providing value-added interfaces on top of Syscoin. And that's a really good thing, because it creates business opportunities.
I imagine an ecosystem where companies may provide such services in return for a small fee - or in the case of mining pools, perhaps take the bonus syscoin service fees for themselves; after all, its only fair, since they have to spend more money to host the full chain and should - are in fact expected to - get rewarded for that.
In essence, those who provide value-added services on top of syscoin don't consider the potentially-large blockchain 'bloat', but their means for conducting business and its size as a necessary business expense.
I'll concede that this is not the commonplace perspective relative to blockchain size. But if you think about it the blockchain is used for far more that mere currency accounting here, and its additional value, in my humble opinion, justifies its additional size.
Hi, by the way - I'm coderboo, the primary programmer (and feature designer) of Syscoin. Thank you for your question, as it is a good one - it addresses succinctly the issue of 'blockchain bloat' and it gave me the chance to say why I think that 'blockchain bloat' is a bit of a misnomer for Syscoin, at least in theory - let's see how it goes in the real world!
solid stuff here! 
