Quote from: cryptrol on January 28, 2015, 01:20:13 PM

Quote from: CanaryInTheMine on January 20, 2015, 06:48:14 PM

Quote from: btc_enigma on January 20, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2b2iu9/take_a_look_at_the_new_storj_video/

These guys just know how to spend your money on making flashy videos. Can you put effort write some code and resolve the technical difficulties like sybill attacks etc. instead of marketing and trying to get more funds

I'm assuming you shoot from the hip, you speak first then you think (maybe)...
Do a little research and reading first and then please come back and bring constructive criticism and input to help Storj. Else, go troll elsewhere.

I have been also looking for answers for the same questions and didn't found any. IMHO the redundancy for the files to stay safe will have to be an order of magnitude greater than the traditional storage, making the storage in the Storj network too expensive. Considering that the "miners" will mine as far as it's profitable to do it, this could pose a BIG risk for the persistency of data stored in Storj.

Not really... Amazon makes 3 copies when you use their storage, so Storj isn't an order of magnitude at all... Outside of Storj, any existing, traditional redundancies use a "magnitude" depending on redundancy chosen.
Storj will make 3 copies by default, and if you want more, you can specify that in your contract and pay more for it... So I dont understand your "orders of magnitude" concern. Can you explain more what you men by it? Btw, have you read the white paper yet?