4 ms·
$2/GB in perpetuity is really cheap. They should write a paper about how they did it, if they haven't already. Edit: I'm assuming they can deliver reliability
by rmbyrro 5y ago
$2/GB in perpetuity is really cheap. They should write a paper about how they did it, if they haven't already.
Edit: I'm assuming they can deliver reliability and durability similar to modern cloud standards, like AWS S3.
- toomuchtodo 5y agoSelf built storage nodes and software for storage system, with an expectation that storage costs continue to decline per GB into the future.
- aksss 5y agobeowolf cluster
- entangledqubit 5y agoI'd also like to see the rest of the assumptions baked in. Is there some trust fund involved -- which requires that we now consider the risk associated with how the $2 is invested to get an adequate return?
- aksss 5y agoI too am a bit confused about that $2/GB for perpetuity. I'm assuming that's a loaded cost representing maintenance, backups, power. A TCO kind of number. Maybe that's a bad assumption?
- akiselev 5y agoIt's based on the assumption that storage costs per GB will continue to decrease for their definition of "perpetuity." If you assume a consistent fall in costs, the total cost becomes a convergent series [1] and there is an upper limit even with an infinite number of years. Suffice it to say, physics is probably going to have a lot to say about that assumption in the coming decades. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_series
- gjs278 5y ago