Thanks a lot for replying. Launch parameters seem reasonable. (Although, just to nitpick - the bandwidth costs in my country for residential region might be higher than that of buying the SSDs).
I probably did a poor job expressing myself so I’ll try again. If I understand correctly Permissible number of shards is a direct function of the altruistic capacity of users. Whether or we attain this number of shards right on launch I don’t know, just talking of ultimate limit. By altruistic capacity is just mean the amount of computational and storage resources being altruistically provided and the number of distinct users who cared to provide them. And hence we should be doing anything and everything to get more users to “care”. Naive blockchain doesn’t benefit too much from 1000 nodes versus 100,000 nodes - sharded system benefits a lot.
And hence grouping blocks or networks by semantic content or economic value might make it easier to care. It’s easier for me to care about “OptimismPBC Mainnet 2” than it is for me to care for “Ethereum shard #43”, because the former is associated with distinct branding, economic activity etc. Bitcoin, Cardano, Solana, Polkadot all have different sets of users running nodes because they have different people caring about them for different reasons. Hence they’re not as tightly competing for the same pool of altruistic capacity the way ethereum’s shards are competing among each other.
Hence made the second post. Should rollups custody their own history?