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?