Live data from Hacker News

The future is not self-hosted

drewlyton.com

81–90 of 459 posts

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#81
post #59

The author gets into a few issues I’ve talked at length about on my own blogs over the years, with the same gist: self-hosting is a better alternative than corporate cloud providers, but isn’t suitable for the everyman due to its complexity and associated costs. The grim reality is that most people and businesses still have such disdain for their own privacy, security, and/or sovereignty, and that’s not going to chan…

Docker has basically solved the deployment issue. For 9 out of 10 self hosted programs you can have them up in ~5 minutes with a docker compose and env file. There are whole OSes built around it, like casaOS which gives users a neat front end/dashboard for their self hosted stuff. Also for cost eh idk. For $300 you can have enough hardware and storage to self host everything, even a Google photos alternative. Most pe…

> For 9 out of 10 self hosted programs you can have them up in ~5 minutes with a docker compose and env file.

That is a very small part of operating. How about keeping it update and running? Data backed up?

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#82
post #30

I strongly agree with the global sentiment. If you can't actually download a copy of a digital content as a mere file, then you can't really host it and serve it. You can't host your own Spotify-clone even if you are allowed to listen to songs. However, you can still download music on Bandcamp to feed your Spotify-clone. You can't host your own your own digital Video Game Store usually because of various DRM, or beca…

[deleted]

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#83

What we need now from this vibrant community of smart, dedicated, part-time sys-admins is to think... beyond individualism What we need first is incentive for smart, dedicated, part-time sys-admins to devote time and effort to community hosting. Without this, it will work --- in the same way that open source works --- without any guarantees or commitments whatsoever. In other words, you're on your own for the most pa…

Woah woah woah I thought as an industry we clearly didn't need sysadmins anymore /s

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What we need first is incentive for smart, dedicated, part-time sys-admins to devote time and effort to community hosting. I’d do it for free. I’ve long been frustrated that I have more reliable infrastructure in my homelab than most companies I’ve worked for, and that none of them have any interest in shifting out of the cloud. I don’t see a market for it, though. Most people are generally happy with Google, Apple…

I’d do it for free. And if you get hit by a car? Or worse --- maybe you get married and have kids ? One big reason people *buy* service is sustainability/longevity/redundancy. There are no absolute guarantees but I think most commercial endeavors nowadays would bet on AWS/Google/MS/Apple over "Hosting by Joe and Friends".

There is no guarantee that the service you buy will exist tomorrow, and if they go out of business, there is no guarantee you can get your data out before they close the platform.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#85
post #30

I strongly agree with the global sentiment. If you can't actually download a copy of a digital content as a mere file, then you can't really host it and serve it. You can't host your own Spotify-clone even if you are allowed to listen to songs. However, you can still download music on Bandcamp to feed your Spotify-clone. You can't host your own your own digital Video Game Store usually because of various DRM, or beca…

Can't backup game save on switch, then what am I doing with these memory cards with switch games data on them?

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#86

What we need now from this vibrant community of smart, dedicated, part-time sys-admins is to think... beyond individualism What we need first is incentive for smart, dedicated, part-time sys-admins to devote time and effort to community hosting. Without this, it will work --- in the same way that open source works --- without any guarantees or commitments whatsoever. In other words, you're on your own for the most pa…

> When you need something more with service and reliability, well --- you're right back to paying corporate overlords.

Not all corporate overloads are equal. Or rather, if you and your buddies get together and pay the $350+fees to legalzoom to start a corporation, you too, can be a corporate overload. There's still miles to go before you're Facebook, but congratulations, you're now... still the same person you were before you clicked that button on legalzoom's webpage and spent $500 or whatever.

Where is the problem of people turning into corporate overloads for you? Is it at 10 employees? 100? 1,000? 10,000? If we're too stupid to differentiate specific corporations because their legal structure means they're all exactly the same, then yeah, I guess there's no hope and we're all doomed.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#87

So, the thing we have right now is Tailscale - and it's freaking awesome. But I want the next thing. Which is like Tailscale2, but for people, not machines. I want to tell Tailscale2 about all of the people in my life, and which of my self-hosted apps they're allowed to talk to. And if they're also running a self-hosted app, then I want our apps to federate together. It feels like we're suuuuuper close to having this…

You can invite other users into your tailnet.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#88
One company comes to mind that is uniquely positioned to capitalize on the current situation by offering a convenient self-hosting solution: Ubiquiti. Despite their pretty bad missteps 5 years ago, their UniFi product range is still very decent and user-friendly for SOHO/SMB networking, and they seem to have the appetite to continue expanding their product line into adjacent markets.

I have deployed simple UniFi setups for all my relatives, and they are very happy (though they couldn't have done it themselves). IMHO, they have the DNA to go further and offer a full self-hosted cloud, if they're willing to put in the effort to make it even easier and more integrated.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#89

Self hosting reminds me of the world of smartphones just before the advent of the iPhone. Using a phone as a mini computer was possible. Downloading and using apps happened. I even used offline maps. It was still the preserve of nerds while regular people "couldn't understand why you'd use a phone to do anything other than text and call". SUDDENLY once it became seamless and trivial to set everything and it was all b…

Pre-iphone I had my MythTV server recording and transcoding TV shows and then adding them to an RSS feed that my flip-phone would sync whenever plugged in. Unplug my phone in the morning and watch last night's Daily Show on the bus ride to work. Kind of crazy to think of what we could do even back then

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#90
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a pain in the ass to set up self hosting. Phones are amazingly powerful. Why not "self host" apps on phones?

What happens to the site when that phone gets lost or stolen or falls on the floor and breaks?

Phone apps could backup data to another location the same way a laptop can.
Post reply on HN