Farcaster

Why is it that storage is twice as expensive for reactions than for casts? Surely people react more than they cast? And also in terms of data used, storing a like should require less storage than storing the entire content of a cast, right?

This is the explanation I've seen. I know there have been previous discussions about how these limits affect behavior, so perhaps others will chime in.

Computational biologist, data scientist, digital artist | 
https://clauswilke.art/links | Hosting /ai-art & /clauswilke

This is the explanation I've seen. I know there have been previous discussions about how these limits affect behavior, so perhaps others will chime in.

https://warpcast.com/v/0x06407001

Writer, senior editor, music journalist, GenX eldergoth, Moxiesplainer. https://paragraph.xyz/@danicaswanson https://tinyurl.com/Black-Stone-Wordsmith

Maybe, but if you do the math it just doesn't add up for me. There's no way 2500 reactions require more than 1MB of storage. So 1GB of storage (~500 images or 1h of video) requires the equivalent of 1000 storage units, or $7000 / year.

@v @dwr.eth Would be interested to hear the justification for these incredibly high storage costs. My expectation would be that for maybe $10 / month I can have effectively infinite storage, and that's not the case as far as I can see in the current model.

Imagine somebody told you the annual cost of hosting 1h of video is $7000, but if more than 50 people do so or you want to host more than 50 videos it doubles to $14,000 / year. You'd tell them they're insane and you'll rent your storage at AWS for <$1 / year, thank you very much.