I would buy it. If I can get a decent brand new car to get from point A to point B for 10k, I wouldn’t even consider the other 40k options. I’d laugh at the people who have to waste that extra money to make themselves look richer or whatever.

Lol as a tech dweeb / internet loser I’d like to see them try that argument. That’s why we’re here in the first place!

Amazon is definitely not the only one doing cloud infrastructure. I really don’t think we’d be pissing anyone off.

I think storing the DB in multiple places is the most important part of this. There could even be different levels of cohosting. You would ideally always have at least two servers hosting the full DB going all the way back in time. Those would be the most important to implement just to have an always available service. Then you could have people that might not have enough resources to hold everything just host all of the most recent and high-demand data. Some advanced server architecture will for sure be needed if this model is going to succeed. It just isn’t possible to do everything on a single server. As far as processing load from running the server, I can’t imagine that will be much of a problem compared to actually storing the data. I am sure a lot of this is all problems that have already been solved and old solutions could be used. Maybe something similar to the torrenting system, with just a few controller servers.