Storj DCS

More gateways, I see…

The multi-tenant gateway is deployed in multiple locations around the world which have peering relationships with the large centralized cloud providers, making data migration and hybrid operations much faster and much less expensive. Storj will continue to support locally hosted gateways as a first-class option for those customers who prefer to host their own gateways.

I feel like the gateway is the way most of these ‘decentralized’ projects are moving. First they setup a network which has decentralized properties, then they create centralised gateways off the back of them. They seek to control the gateway, to generate income, just like Google, Facebook, etc, before them. They want to be the new middlemen, between users and their data.

I’m not saying this is unethical or bad business. It is a tried and tested model. However, decentralised it is not. These gateways will seek to monopolise traffic, through sweetners like subsidies, will market themselves as the primary gateway (even taking the project name in storj case) and will work towards centralisation for profit.


As long as users are prepared to pay the put costs, I’m not worried about farmers. If the put cost is high enough to make the farmer some money, they will come. If still they don’t, community members can, as can maidsafe.

Having too much data demand and too little storage supply is a good problem to have, imo. It can be easily addressed. However, not having users and good data is a much tougher and much more important problem to tackle.

Ofc, the put price has to be competitive though, which is really what storj is subsidising here. They are making it artificially cheap to send data through their gateway, to cement their market position as the middleman of choice. While farmers will get paid, their rates haven’t been cut too (although presumably storj dcs could add their own farmers?).

The safe network equivalent to this approach is subsidising put costs, making it cheaper for users to store data. As I said in the link above, I’m not against that tactic, as high put costs could deter good data. Such subsidies would also feed directly into the network, not some maidsafe controlled gateway or some such.


Here you can precisely not know the future because of the humans involved - what will they do next, who knows. Mad old humans.

Whereas with Safe, there will be some actual certainties about the future - your lazy dog photo is safe forever, etc.


12 posts were split to a new topic: “Isms”