>Makes me wonder how the distribution on other filesharing/torrent networks looks like.
I think the key difference is in filesharing networks, there are tens/hundreds/thousands copies of data, and each peer can jettison the data at any time without penalty. In contrast, storage networks (I'm using sia as an example here) only have three copies (by default), require upfront commitment (6 months by default), and you stand to lose your collateral in the event you delete the data prematurely. The latter two properties exist to counteract the unreliability associated with only having 3 copies if peers can randomly drop out at will.
>will the same apply to high-capacity harddisks, due to people trying to run mini-datacemters for profit?
Theoretically no. Presumably because every gigabyte of storage that's being bought for the storage network, is every gigabyte that someone doesn't have to buy to store their data.
I think the key difference is in filesharing networks, there are tens/hundreds/thousands copies of data, and each peer can jettison the data at any time without penalty. In contrast, storage networks (I'm using sia as an example here) only have three copies (by default), require upfront commitment (6 months by default), and you stand to lose your collateral in the event you delete the data prematurely. The latter two properties exist to counteract the unreliability associated with only having 3 copies if peers can randomly drop out at will.
>will the same apply to high-capacity harddisks, due to people trying to run mini-datacemters for profit?
Theoretically no. Presumably because every gigabyte of storage that's being bought for the storage network, is every gigabyte that someone doesn't have to buy to store their data.