What I am not saying is that Sia is not viable or that cloud storage providers have no downsides, which they clearly do. I did not mean to imply that there is anything wrong with this service, just to express my annoyance with the comparison. I am not happy that my comment got so much attention, because I had no intention to overshadow the announcement with my single gripe.
The line that is annoying me and probably others is this:
> Buyers are essentially paying Amazon each month the entire cost of the hard drives used to store their data
...They're not. Because redundancy. Because electricity, CPUs, network, software development, etc.
The comparison is meaningful setup for discussing decentralized cloud storage.
The comparison establishes the fact hat Amazon's price is not coming from the physical storage HW itself, its the everything around it. Then you can move to discussing how to get other parts cheaper.
The line that is annoying me and probably others is this:
> Buyers are essentially paying Amazon each month the entire cost of the hard drives used to store their data
...They're not. Because redundancy. Because electricity, CPUs, network, software development, etc.