What is good TB price?
-
Hi all,
I just want to open discussion about "good" hosting prices SC/Tb.
If we look example DropBox price is pretty straight forward it is 9.99 $/Tb (or €/Tb).
(And all other similar services)9.99 $ is around 570 SC (~0,0175 $/SC at the momen).
So let's keep that as base price.We do not know how well DropBox actually is distributing data or encrypting data. So question is SIA proving more advanced features and how much that will (or should) bring prices up?
How about Amazon prices or Azure?
With those I assume you can decentralized data, but question is how much those costs.Of course SIA let's ppl to decide how much their store costs, but let's think this in general level.
This wonders me as I am going to start hosting. I am not looking to ROI etc but going to host just to support SIA network and I want to see this one succeed in future.
Let's try to keep "effort" out of discussion and just focus price per TB and how extra value should or should not affect pricing.-jlahtela
-
These are all factors, as are direct competitors such as maybe Storj.
My expectation? Plain storage price (Dropbox) is going to be 0 sooner or later, it's the value add features that Sia or Amazon S3 have that will make people pay for storage for longer.
Not sure we can quantify this and that feature in cents per feature per TB, because everybody values the features differently.
For some, Sia will be the sweet spot - if the price is right.
And let's not forget - there's only one way the price will be going. It's a race to the bottom.
-
Yep I agree that it will be fighting of the bottom.
But if we think situation at the moment.
Would similar price as DropBox be good for hosting?Would ppl who are in SIA accepting that and focus more to SIA?
What about in future? How we get more "normal users" who want to use only backup/decentralized store (and hopefully sharing in future)?
Playing around with crypto currency is big step for normal users when they are used to just file in credit card info and they are good to go!Should hosting be more cheaper to "make up" the effort or will tech supremacy still get "normal users" to SIA?
-
I'm not SIA, but here is my input; today no price is really set on a a good use case. There is litterally no demand for SIA storage. Not because it is bad storage but because it is very unaccessible and very difficult for users to consume. They ahve to understand the principle behind collatteral, the contracts, holding a special coin, downloading the full client, We need a stable network with good functionality (look at the road map - there is some good thinking already, but it is not progressing very fast). And most of all we need to have other partners engaged and motivated to build nice solutions around the SIA back bone. I understand that SIA focus on the core functions of a decentralized storage net work. Today the utilization is less than 2 percent. There is no business cace for renting out storage at scale before the consumption is eased up..
-
For all I know there's a lot of enterprise storage (i.e. Amazon S3) in the future of Sia, and end user storage (a.k.a. Dropbox) is not so much in focus of the devs right now.
Separately, but maybe related to that, I don't think that end users like me offering a few TB on Sia is the target model for Sia either. I can see a massive centralization of storage in "cheap" locations, like with crypto mining, and/or a future where every IoT device is offering a bit of spare storage on Sia as well, i.e. a classic core-edge network topology.
-
still I'm not SIA, but as I understood the idea behind SIA was in fact given birth to as a means of soak up and capitalize on minor plots of data laying around on completely normal users PCs, and not so muct appealing to large enterprises. Corporations, especially the large ones is contradictive to decentralization.
a quote from SIAtech: "...We believe data should be free. We aim to liberate the unused bits of the world and construct the largest storage superserver on the planet."
the road map: https://trello.com/b/Io1dDyuI/sia-public-roadmap
Taek's very good write up on how the mechanics behind hosting works: https://forum.sia.tech/topic/1037/the-hosting-handbook
-
I personally don't think SC prices should be based off corporate infrastructure prices like AWS- Drop Box - etc.... Why?
- Corporates are stand alone sites that have their own expenses and people to pay for maintaining those structures.
- Corporates have built in profit margins that are based off the above mentioned expenses and investors
- Corporates are centralized storage
- Corporates are in competition with other coporates (see the items listed above).
Sia is not a corporate owned centralized infrastructure. Therefore pricing and also the way the data is stored is miles apart from "other" perceived competition. AWS- Drop Box are not direct competitors... because SC is in its own sphere. Sure they may have fancy bells and whistles, but the core product is "data storage" and its perceived privacy / security that SC offers in a much diff framework to the buyer.
SIA COIN is offering secure and private data storage across global platform. That IMO has a far high pricing model than the existing corporate who do not have a global data structure environment. I do not think the SC should be astronomically higher, but it certainly doesnt need to be lower value.
Just wanted to give my perspective.
-
@moorsc0de; good points...
The real price in fiat currency, eg. USD is determined on the value of the coins, that is at the moment really on the rise... The other factot is determined on the price the network agrees to from demand/supply of the storage it self..Contracts can last for long time and price for the storage is determined at the time the contract is established... It can lead to a funny pricing.
I have contracts fomr when the cons were dead cheap... If I calculate the USD price for each GB for each period of time, the storeageprice is very high, given the jump in price of the coins.
-
I have been considering what "I think" is a fair price for Sia storage. I have been approaching this from 2 perspectives.
-
How much can I theoretically host?
The sky is as high as my budget in theory. I have already roughly scoped the price of servers with 160TB of usable HDD space each. The only question is how long would they take to pay off if I was renting the space out to the Sia (or storj for that matter). N.B. Putting a server like that on my home network would be unethical IMO as renters could never retrieve that much data over an ADSL home internet connection. -
How much can I ethically host from home?
Hosting intrinsically lends itself to internet connections that are synchronous. In other words, uploading as much as downloading. Myself, like what I guess is a lot of other hosts are sharing their space over is a home internet connection. These connections are, in the vast majority asynchronous. I know that in a perfect world, the theoretical maximum I can download (to host) is in the vicinity of 3.6TB/month (much lower in the real world) and the amount I can upload is only a fraction (around 1/5th if that) of that. I currently have just over 4TB shared so I know I'll be pushing my connection to it's limit and probably beyond if renters want to retrieve their data at the same rate they store it each month. IMO, 3x redundancy is inadequate if the Sia dev team want renters to have the same experience they receive from DropBox et al . So I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest the dev team PUNISH users with more than 3TB of space to host rather than rewarding those with more than 4TB. Just to protect the renters' user experience. This is the Sia networks' biggest weakness.
I have quickly priced renting 1/4 rack and a 1Gbps synchronous all you can eat up and down internet connection locally. The cost is fixed $550 or thereabouts per month. But there is no way I could recover those costs plus equipment given the cut-throat pricing of space per month currently. There is no way I can currently justify spending a fixed amount in fiat in the hope renters will retrieve their data in sufficient quantities via the downloadbandwidthprice variable.
-
-
At present Sia is relying on hosts donating their spare space to the network. What a host is receiving is only symbolic "charity gesture".
It is ok for testing while developing but not sustainable when Sia goes in production.
The biggest threat to Sia is the global trend of getting rid of local storage (moving everything to cloud).
If people stop buying and running "classic computers" (desktops) the available storage for Sia will drop as there will not be any unused spare storage space as such...Regarding the price for host- I offer my storage at 550SC/TB/month and still get new contracts and uploaded data.
Though, in the last week my host has fallen from ~#160 to ~#190 on the SiaHub ranking so I assume I'll get no new contracts in the near future. But I'm happy with that, I have ~146 active contracts and the low active contract count means less network traffic (more available bandwidth for me).
-
@sifer - I agree. Also as long as there is no real demand for storage in the SIA network where we have for very long time only seen a 2% utilization there is no real market price, I think - what is needed and what we also see to emerge is 3rd party solutions that can make the consumption of the space less nerdy.
Also, if SIA at any time will move to the corporate market I can't see how a pricing model can be made that does not fluctuate wildy to any fiat currency du to the speculative nature of any crypotcurrency. Corporate world is not going to adapt SIA coins as their base currency :-/
