Topic: Siacoin Epic Monster Moon - page 17. (Read 76285 times)

No, because the full file doesn't need to exist on all 30 hosts - if you read the page I linked, Taek links to Reed-Solomon error correction encoding. These are codes that can reconstruct missing parts of a file.

You would pay 30 hosts, but not for 30 copies of the file.

In other words, you'd pay for the 100Gb usage, plus whatever's needed for the reed-solomon error correction.

So to store 100 gigabytes, an effective 3 terabytes is used in 10-to-30?

One has to pay 30 hosts for that?

When there are several big hosts you can expect a consistent 100% uptime and very good bandwidth.

The "maidsafe" approach is what Sia does too...Not sure what you're talking about. https://forum.sia.tech/topic/108/how-sia-works

What you described is what most block-based network storage does. This approach has been used for over 15 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venti

At first I liked the idea of sia but when I think more about it, it don't see the future of it. Business will likely not use Sia, they want consistent uptime, bandwith, support, solution, etc and most of all, they want to know who they are dealing business with so if there is any problem, at least they can dispute the provider. For end-user, they sure care about their anonymity, privacy and security that is why they may not trust single cloud storage provider but then there are the uptime and bandwidth problem. When you upload your file on Sia host, it is still on single computer. If that computer have problem then your data is hurt. Cloud provider company have backup plan and rarely let this happen.

I think that Maidsafe have better approach. Instead of upload a file to unknown single host, it first encrypt the data and then split it into piece. Each host store only a part of your file. Moreover, for the same piece, they are copied and stored on more than one host so even if one go down, there is still another one. They also say that if a host shut down, the pieces on that host will be first copy and upload to other hosts but I don't know how they will do it. There is a problem, if one computer go down, how can it make sure that all file are upload before the host shut down. However, there are more than one copy of your file that was uploaded so I think that Maidsafe approach is better than Sia.

The benefit of decentralized storage is redundancy/availability, mostly. In theory, more redundancy means faster download speeds and also cheaper prices. If every single person in the world shared their hard drive there would be a lot of empty space up for use! I would say the majority of the time I see relatives only using 40% of their hard drives. I would say this is a fair estimate, up to 70%.

That's really my only point! To me it's up to the people if Sia succeeds or not. They either care about the ideologies and benefits behind decentralized storage, or they don't! So it will be interesting. The announcement of the ASICs was fantastic news because it puts more power into the hands of the people - now we just have to see if they want that power or not.

If we look at history, people have a tendency to not want power/hold responsibility. Otherwise we'd all be running our own businesses and powering our houses off the grid.

We have a very anti-share world right now.

So...yeah I hate to say it, but I think ultimately because of social constructs, Sia will fail unless it's used *transparently*. People using Sia without even knowing. I think there is real money to be made there. Linking many powerful storage hosts together sounds god damn fantastic (Google drive, Dropbox, Skydrive combination anyone?). Again, Sia's power is in its contract-based logic.

I don't even understand what's the benefit of decentralized storage to be honest.

Or the emphasis on the encryption techonology.

I mean, you can encrypt your files and use a "regular" file hosting service anyway.

I kind of see your point about storage providers utilizing Sia on their own, but I don't know what are their costs just for infrastructure, hardware, network and all of the employees.

I don't think that when you are giving 7$/terabyte to Dropbox (e.g.) most of it goes to the material aspect. I'm pretty sure they buy millions of drives for much less than we can get one.

But then again, why would they need to do so on Sia and not their own like banks did with R3 rather than using Ripple?

I think I'm kind of missing your point tho.

So what is your go-to solution for decentralized storage then?...Because unless there is incentive to host a file (money), decentralized storage is never going to fly. Just look at torrents. There are many torrents where there are no seeders anymore for a file.

I've invested in Sia too and I'm open to good advice. I will be transparent and say I have not run the storage/price numbers myself, but you bring up a very valid point. I will get back to this aspect of the conversation later.

Skipping ahead: if you have 10-15 big host providers, I can't see why Sia would fail. There is already 1 definite one. Sia is simply the middle contract layer.

Users -> Storage provider businesses -> Sia -> Storage host businesses

Now the next question might be: why not cut out the middle man?

Because storage provider businesses may offer on-site storage as well as decentralized storage or a mix of both. I can see this working out well.

What are your thoughts on this?

1/2. Redundancy costs. A lot. Who's gonna pay 17.60 to store 1 TB on Sia (3x redundancy) when he can get illimited TBs on Dropbox (and much more services, and doesn't pay bandwidth.


Sick of people buying and pumping things they don't understand. I'm actually really sorry for them.

You need common sense to understand that to store your files on Sia (with the infinite downs Sia has compared to a professional use) it's either cheap for the guest and low (to not) profitable for the host, or it's expensive for the guest and profitable for the host.

Right now it's basically both, it's close to 6$ (no bandwidth included) for no redundancy storage per terabyte, hosts meanwhile make basically no buck, go check on siahub.

Siacoin talks about 2$/TB. Now use your logic, who would ever make a hosting computer for 2$/month/terabyte. Nobody.

So again, it's either cheap for guest and unprofitable for host, or it's expensive for the guest and profitable for the host. It can't be both for sure.

Meanwhile the marketcap is 500 billions. For a network that store 27 terabytes of data.

When the dot-com bubble of cryptos will hit (and we all know that it's going to hit us sooner or later, entire cryptomarket is bigger than the GDP of many countries in the world) Siacoin won't be one of those saving itself.

You may be interested in speculating, I feel myself more of an investor. I try to understand what I buy, I run the numbers.

They don't work for Siacoin, sorry.

1. Uptime depends on hosts yes, but there is redundancy. You're telling me all hosts will just abandon Sia? There are businesses already setup to offer hosting for Sia (there is one specific one that comes to mind on Sia's forums. Look around there.)

2. Sorry, by reliability I meant redundance!

3. You can download from many hosts at once on the Sia network. It's block-storage based. Like I said, it's torrent-esque because you can download from many sources at once.


Uh, where can I get free, fast, anonymous, encryption-by-default hosting?

Another use I can think of for Sia: lossy big data. Store lots of records onto the network that are not important until the network becomes larger. Once it's larger (so more redundance), important data could be put there too.


Why do you say bullshit like this? To scare people? Anyway, let the debate continue. I look forward to your responses.

https://mobile.twitter.com/SiaTechHQ/status/877964054999965696


Interesting read


I wonder if this was the big announcement ...

Let's see where SIA gets tomorrow , there seems to be an upside trend

Quoted for the truth, you psychic or something or what's up....? 

I'm going to dump it after the news. Or around then. It's a pie in the sky idea. A great one, but, it's just not going to happen on a reasonable time table.

You guys are a little behind the curve on this one, it should be sitting on the edge of the dump any moment now.  I guess maybe they are riding it out a little longer, but with the fact that the coins value has been moved lately based solely on manipulation is going to make things more and more fun as the week moves forward.
 

your fundamentals are sound.
but right now, people dont need the fundamentals but are relying on announcements and news to pump and profit from sia and most coins   

It's not for all the reasons I told you.


1. uptime depends on the hosts, which are anonymous, contract free users like me and you. You can store all your data on my pc, then I just realize I make much more on burst coins and who cares.

2. What? What do you mean by reliability.

3. How? Download bandwidth depends on a connection between me and you, and I doubt neither of us has a network comparable to professional services which have multi hundreds gigabits of connections.

Do you really believe a business is going to host files on Joe's computer that will download a terabyte in 30 hours?

Also, as I already pointed out:

-you can't detax your expenses on Sia network, no bills.

-sia is absolutely unfit do database storage

-professional services backup your data (and store it for longer than contract), there's basically no risk of losing your files on amazon/azure/ecc. If your host goes offline, he's gone.

-for sia to have nice prices for customers, it needs to have shit prices for hosts. That's a fact, period.


So it solves a problem that has already free alternatives. It solves a non existing problem.


And it's not a valid alternative to better coins that have exactly this purpose.

You're free to believe in what you want, but you can bring no valid logic to counter my arguments.

Can you think of any bad calls you may have made?

To Aquazi:

Sia is not meant for users like you and I. It's meant for businesses.

Sia offers this:

1. High uptime, despite what you say
2. High reliability, despite what you say
3. High download bandwidth, despite what you say

This is a perfect platform for multimedia storage, or any torrent-esque storage really.

So you are right, average joe don't give a shit about Sia.

But the average joe will be whom these businesses built around Sia will be catering to.

I would like to also emphasize:

SIA IS A CONTRACT COIN.

Not a storage coin, like many incorrectly assume (even me)! Read the whitepaper.

This means it can be used for more than just storage - for what else, not sure, but I'll be sure to give an update once I figure out something practical.

usual non sense.

I don't think Sia's a bad investment but people simply do not understand what they buy.

So let's think about Siacoin: it's basically a platform where you can store and buy unused space on hard drives.

Now, let's think who is the consumer of such product:

-average Joe: so, average Joe needs space to backup some of his files. He can get 15GB for free. If it's not enough he can easily rent one terabyte for around 7$/month. Still not enough? Dropbox can provide him with unlimited space for 15$/month.

How in the hell can Sia address him with complicated and unreliable storage?

Dropbox can guarantee a 99.9999% uptime if not more, average joe hosting on sia network? Generally below 95% (which automatically excludes most business cases for data storage).

Look at complicate to use Sia for the guy is: he's expected to go on exchange, buy bitcoins, trade them with sia, install wallet, create keys, withdraw to the exact wallet, find host.

Now he can finally pay:

Let's see Sia's rates:

http://siahub.info/

5,80$ average for 1TB/month and this does not include bandwidth. And the average uptime of sia hosts is way below 90 % and you have a serious risk of losing your data.

Dropbox can offer you 1 TB a 7$ without all of that hassle and 6TB (200 GB/day) of bandwidth.

Now, ask yourselves, can Sia (at the moment) compete with those prices?

No.

And if you think it could in the future, I have an answer for that later.

Can Sia offer the same support, uptime, ease of use, backups, commenting, phone support, office integration, live sharing, ecc?

No.

I could go long and long and tell you why Sia isn't absolutely an option for business and enterprise. Business can either store data in house or put it in a clod where it's easier and safer to use and has virtually no downtime (also Sia's is absolutely not fit for database and bigdata, it's more of a backup service). How much upload bandwidth average Joe has also? I can download at very fast speeds gigabytes of data from amazon/dropbox, only limited by my network. But how do you actually expect somebody to host files on your computer with your limited bandwidth? Also, most business can get tax reductions for their business costs (it's the case in Italy, my country). Who's gonna bill "Saint Mary's hospital" for 150 terabyte of storage on sia network?

Really, tell me what's the real case use of siacoin.

Now, let's take this from the point of view of the hosts (the actual users like me and you that want to be paid for giving up the space on their disks).

Only 2 % of the sia storage's used right now.. and check how much space: 25.7 Terabyes as I write. I have 4 terabytes on my own computer.

That is, the entire sia network right now stores the equivalent of 10 desktop computers, and the equivalent of 600 $ worth of hard drives.

But let's talk about the hosts. A 1 terabyte hard drive costs around 45 $ and earns you 5.80$ a month. That's an 8 months ROI, quite high for cryptos right now, and I'll ignore the fact that to run a hard drive you actually need a computer around it, constantly up. You're also fighting to host this data with thousands of users constantly undercutting it.

Now, if you have more than 36 hours of downtime a month (so below 95%) your likelihood of being a host goes very low for months (because Sia network ranks you very poorly).

So you invested 45$, probably more, for a small chance to host somebody's files for around 5$ a month hoping he'll also download and upload a bit so you get also siacoins for bandwidth (maybe another 5 $, top).

This may start looking good, but honestly, are you gonna give up on gaming because somebody's uploading 10 hours.

And the current marketcap for Sia coin is more than half a billion USD.

So, all in all we have:

-a technology that does not appeal neither to the average consumer nor most certainly business users for whom data has very high value (even if it's the third backup of a database or something).

-a technology that hardly rewards average Joe. Nobody's storing their files on sia network right now, probably only few people that have thousands of sia mined/bought at 30 sats that want to test the technology. Also, you can make 3/4 times more by mining bursts on your computer.

-a market cap of 500 billions for a real network use of 27 terabyes. You can get 30 terabytes on dropox for 15 $, not 500 billions. You can rent 27 terabytes of space on amazon for 337 dollars/month with reduced use (and holy fuck who'd use sia network for constant up/down streams, it's not going to host databases).

So you expect the price to go higher?

Maybe, but Siacoin has really no appeal to anybody. To conclude:

to be profitable for customers (with all the bandwidth, support, integrations, uptime, limitations standard services do not have) it must be unprofitable for hosts (and it already is) while both of them are on a full-of-hassle with no benefits platform.

Cryptomania

What's your price prediction ?