In the context of one relayed and stored message, there are at least three roles:
the sender;
the server storing the message;
the client querying the message.
We need to understand what is the motivation of each of these players. In the PoC version of Store incentivization, we focus on just the server and the client. The question remains: what is the reasoning for the sender to mark the message as non-ephemeral? Would it be fair to make the sender to compensate the server for the (part of?) the storage costs? Can we quantify the value of the message? Does it depend on: the point of view (the value for the sender, for the client, etc), and on time (the value when it is sent, the value when it is queried)?
one of the main differences I see is that in decentralized storage the market is mostly based on what the owner/originator is willing to pay, whereas the market we are building for Waku is mostly based on the value of a persisted message to recipients at retrieval time.
In the context of one relayed and stored message, there are at least three roles:
We need to understand what is the motivation of each of these players. In the PoC version of Store incentivization, we focus on just the server and the client. The question remains: what is the reasoning for the sender to mark the message as non-ephemeral? Would it be fair to make the sender to compensate the server for the (part of?) the storage costs? Can we quantify the value of the message? Does it depend on: the point of view (the value for the sender, for the client, etc), and on time (the value when it is sent, the value when it is queried)?
Related comment by @jm-clius (excerpt):
Related issues: #29, #32, #34.