4 ms·

> files could be broken up into shards and distributed across multiple nodes You can setup any old distributed database to do this... If there was a benefit t

by hudon 9y ago

> files could be broken up into shards and distributed across multiple nodes You can setup any old distributed database to do this... If there was a benefit to breaking down a file rather than replicating it, AWS would be using this efficiency to provide a better service. > the effect that a commoditized pricing system would have on the costs of a distributed storage solution It'll always be cheaper for someone to sell their hard drive than to sell access to their hard drive, just like it is cheaper to buy bitcoin instead of mining it. Here is why: let's say Alice is profit-driven and greedy and is making $1 profit for 1gb of space. She can use those profits to buy more hardware, make more profit, buy more hardware, and so on and so forth until she has 100,000gb of space being offered. At that point, because of economies of scale, it will cost Alice less to maintain 100,000gb then the total cost of 100,000 people hosting 1gb each (eg. reduce total electricity cost because of bulk purchase). Now, Alice can grow her operation so big (say, 100 petabytes) that it actually becomes no longer profitable for Bob to host 1gb. Alice has so much lower costs per gb that she was able to drive the price per gb down to a point where the price is lower than Bob's costs. This is basic economy of scale so far, right? And it's the same reason why data centers filled with ASICs make it useless for you to mine Bitcoin on your laptop. OK now that Alice is hosting say 100petabytes and has priced out all the individuals on the network, she will be subject to data policy rules and will have to obey law enforcement to kick out users that are using her hard drives for illegal activity. Alice is now AWS.

baddox 9y ago
> If there was a benefit to breaking down a file rather than replicating it, AWS would be using this efficiency to provide a better service. Are you suggesting that AWS is doing every possible thing that would increase efficiency, or in other words, that AWS' services are optimally efficient? That seems very unlikely.
- hudon 9y ago
  Yes. This is how capitalism works. If there is an inefficiency in the market, there is an opportunity for a competitor to beat you on price or quality. If AWS is not incorporating these efficiencies into their tech, then Microsoft Azure will and beat them by providing either a cheaper or higher quality service. If FileCoin actually worked as a better technology, Google or some big name would say they will start using it to beat AWS in the data storage game. I'm not saying FileCoin is useless, it is useful to store 3D printed gun designs and illegal media, because it is outside the reach of the law. But to think it is a more efficient technical solution to data storage is a bit naive...
  - JauntyHatAngle 9y ago
    "Yes. This is how capitalism works. If there is an inefficiency in the market, there is an opportunity for a competitor to beat you on price or quality. If AWS is not incorporating these efficiencies into their tech, then Microsoft Azure will and beat them by providing either a cheaper or higher quality service." Not that I'm saying Filecoin or a decentralised storage coin is in any way the way forward or even a competitor.. but saying that is how capitalism works is such rubbish. In an ideal system you are right, but how often have you worked for a company that is raking in the cash by marketing well and being the "established" hand in the market? There are so many companies kicking around that are the biggest player in their field that continue to make bank because accountants and upper management decide they are the proven, safe pick in the market and have signed up for long, entrenched software packages. Also, if this upended the entrenched business model companies were using, they would not be able to quickly switch to it. There are plenty of ways this could be the a better solution and AWS wouldn't switch to it, saying capitalism proves this is not a good argument.
    - hudon 9y ago
      It is not just AWS. The data storage market is saturated with competitors fighting hard to come out on top. Amazon, Apple, Box, Dropbox, Google, Microsoft are all in this and some of these companies have massive R&D budgets, have a history of delivering cutting edge tech and have strategies to overcome the Innovator's Dilemma (which is the problem you're describing). It is precisely because these companies are not entrenched that my argument holds. But also consider the technical downside to FileCoin (slow connections to unreliable laptops VS fast connections to redundant data centers) and the economic downsides to FileCoin (it won't be worth hosting due to economies of scale).
      - klodolph 9y ago
        Just a minor nit... Apple doesn't really belong on that list. But you're right in general. Cloud storage is a big race to the bottom, and add-ons are going to be what's monetized. I can't see Filecoin or Siacoin having any advantages here. I don't know how big the Filecoin network is, but it's very telling that they're not sharing this information. I expect that the amount of data stored is not large. Siacoin makes this available but total contracts are currently a bit under 200TB. For those of you keeping track at home, that's a single medium-size storage appliance.

by hudon 9y ago

baddox 9y ago

> If there was a benefit to breaking down a file rather than replicating it, AWS would be using this efficiency to provide a better service. Are you suggesting that AWS is doing every possible thing that would increase efficiency, or in other words, that AWS' services are optimally efficient? That seems very unlikely.

hudon 9y ago
Yes. This is how capitalism works. If there is an inefficiency in the market, there is an opportunity for a competitor to beat you on price or quality. If AWS is not incorporating these efficiencies into their tech, then Microsoft Azure will and beat them by providing either a cheaper or higher quality service. If FileCoin actually worked as a better technology, Google or some big name would say they will start using it to beat AWS in the data storage game. I'm not saying FileCoin is useless, it is useful to store 3D printed gun designs and illegal media, because it is outside the reach of the law. But to think it is a more efficient technical solution to data storage is a bit naive...
- JauntyHatAngle 9y ago
  "Yes. This is how capitalism works. If there is an inefficiency in the market, there is an opportunity for a competitor to beat you on price or quality. If AWS is not incorporating these efficiencies into their tech, then Microsoft Azure will and beat them by providing either a cheaper or higher quality service." Not that I'm saying Filecoin or a decentralised storage coin is in any way the way forward or even a competitor.. but saying that is how capitalism works is such rubbish. In an ideal system you are right, but how often have you worked for a company that is raking in the cash by marketing well and being the "established" hand in the market? There are so many companies kicking around that are the biggest player in their field that continue to make bank because accountants and upper management decide they are the proven, safe pick in the market and have signed up for long, entrenched software packages. Also, if this upended the entrenched business model companies were using, they would not be able to quickly switch to it. There are plenty of ways this could be the a better solution and AWS wouldn't switch to it, saying capitalism proves this is not a good argument.
  - hudon 9y ago
    It is not just AWS. The data storage market is saturated with competitors fighting hard to come out on top. Amazon, Apple, Box, Dropbox, Google, Microsoft are all in this and some of these companies have massive R&D budgets, have a history of delivering cutting edge tech and have strategies to overcome the Innovator's Dilemma (which is the problem you're describing). It is precisely because these companies are not entrenched that my argument holds. But also consider the technical downside to FileCoin (slow connections to unreliable laptops VS fast connections to redundant data centers) and the economic downsides to FileCoin (it won't be worth hosting due to economies of scale).
    - klodolph 9y ago
      Just a minor nit... Apple doesn't really belong on that list. But you're right in general. Cloud storage is a big race to the bottom, and add-ons are going to be what's monetized. I can't see Filecoin or Siacoin having any advantages here. I don't know how big the Filecoin network is, but it's very telling that they're not sharing this information. I expect that the amount of data stored is not large. Siacoin makes this available but total contracts are currently a bit under 200TB. For those of you keeping track at home, that's a single medium-size storage appliance.