Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The future is not self-hosted

drewlyton.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 459 posts

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#281

Post by wobfan »

What. The article reads just as an ad for clouds. It tips into the benefits, ownership problems, setup. Then it says "but how do I share photos???" and this apparently is enough to counter all benefits.

Even if I had to (and this is what I actually do actively) push the photos I want to share to Google Photos, ALL the benefits remain. I see it, it's a slight inconvenience of having to do like 2 more taps and wait for the upload, but that's it. You get so much for this small inconvenience. You own your data, your infrastructure, you're not locked in, and your data is private. But having to share the photos via another app is the dealbreaker?

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#282

Post by wobfan »

wmf wrote: post #200
deathanatos wrote: post #162

The author mostly just hand waves away self-hosting. There's an analogy that compares it to suburbia, but unlike the suburbs where you have to drive 40 minutes to get anywhere interesting, … an Internet hosted service is just as accessible , anywhere. It's a vapid analogy. The only substantive argument I can see is that the technology is immature: > Well...without exposing our services to the public internet and forc…

I've thought deeply about this topic but from the pro-suburbia side and I actually agree with the analogy. At a bare minimum if you want to be independent you need a domain which is ~$10/year. That's a small amount but it's already more than most people will pay. (IMO this is irrational if you're paying >$500/year for cellular service but I digress.) Good home servers like Helm (RIP) or Umbrel are $300+ upfront. A go…

> for services that are already "free".

The problem is that people still believe that if they don't pay money, a service is free. But so many do not question why it is free. Hint: Not because Google just wants you to succeed and have a good life. And then, without any second thought, they literally upload their whole private digital life.

If you don't pay, usually, you're the product.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#284

Post by nicman23 »

bix6 wrote: post #5

I don’t think most people realize how much they’ve given up. Unfortunately it’s a fair bit of work to reclaim everything as your story shows. I switched to my own modem and router recently for privacy from my ISP and it was a fantastic experience / worth it but it cost some money and time which can be hard to find.

they do not even know anything else.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#285

Post by tempodox »

Aurornis wrote: post #176
voxleone wrote: post #155

Self-hosting isn't just about tech choices — it's about *who controls access to knowledge*. During the Enlightenment, owning a physical copy of a book meant intellectual freedom. You didn’t rent ideas; you had them. Today, most digital knowledge is hosted, locked, or streamed — *leased from platforms*, not owned. We’re in fact drifting into *digital feudalism*, where access to culture, tools, and even history depends…

I personally prefer owning my content, physical books, and having local copies. But if I’m being honest, I think this claim that if you don’t own the book you don’t have the knowledge and society will turn into digital feudalism is hyperbole. Knowledge is proliferating faster than ever, becoming more accessible than ever, and it’s easier than ever before to get the info that you’re searching for, even in this streami…

> it feels like this is all some abstract philosophical debate rather than a discussion of what’s really happening in the world.

To judge what's happening in the world, you need a framework. And the frameworks provided by the ubiquitous commercial and political interests are all biased in comparable ways. Abstract philosophical debate is just what the doctor ordered to get you away from the incessant assault of propaganda and brain washing.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#287

Post by nobodywillobsrv »

Is it just me or is the entire concept of "ownership" kind of wrong in the realm of digital (things that can be copy pasted infinitely and distributed mostly for free)?

Instead we should have ideas of AUTH, AUTH fraud (distributing content with wrong authorship), the right to generate revenue by distribution.

Restricting distribution of something that is essentially free to distribute feels wrong. If you tried to explain to aliens that you had solved "food" with a replicator but The Gov actually banned this and people had to starve ... you would likely be met with some questions.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#288

Post by MrJohz »

bostik wrote: post #265
MrJohz wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same was true of the printing press, though, at least in comparison to the communication of the previous era. It enabled lies and propaganda to be spread far quicker than ever before, and by people of every rank in society, with (comparatively) minimal effort. And yet, despite this, we think of Gutenberg's invention as one of the most important tools of the modern era for bringing about societal change and enabli…

> Is there something materially different here with the internet? Yes. There are effectively no hard copies. It is possible to change the historical record of any non-printed material to suit your particular needs like never before. You can think of this as a world beyond Orwell's or Bradbury's wildest nightmares.

On the other hand, it is now easier than ever to make copies of materials that we see. Famously, the internet never forgets, and even the smallest mistakes or slip-ups are retained in perpetuity, as long as someone is interested enough in keeping hold of the original copies. And there are a lot of organisations that are very interested in keeping hold of original copies.

I would argue that the opposite is true: it is now harder than ever to change the historical record, which is why we now talk about hypernormality and post-truth, where even if there is evidence for something, people will still lie and claim the opposite and be believed. We live with an abundance of evidence, and yet the Orwellian ability for people in charge to tell you one thing one day, and another thing the next, has never been stronger.

And I think you're again making the mistake of thinking of the printing press as a device for printing books or other materials designed to be long-lasting and valuable. In practice, the printing press brought about a revolution of flyers and pamphlets - ephemeral documents that were distributed one day and then abandoned the next. These things should change freely, and many never entered the historical record at all.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#289

Post by m3nu »

MoreQARespect wrote: post #9

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…

I set up a service to make hosting those apps as seamless as possible while giving the user control of their data and also sharing revenue with authors to keep projects sustainable. Check it out here:

https://www.pikapods.com/

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#290

Post by oldpersonintx2 »

dgjl wrote: post #231
voxleone wrote: post #155

Self-hosting isn't just about tech choices — it's about *who controls access to knowledge*. During the Enlightenment, owning a physical copy of a book meant intellectual freedom. You didn’t rent ideas; you had them. Today, most digital knowledge is hosted, locked, or streamed — *leased from platforms*, not owned. We’re in fact drifting into *digital feudalism*, where access to culture, tools, and even history depends…

Everyone who relies on digital content, especially served online, will be sorry one day. It is only a matter of time before the grid goes down, the country restricts the internet, or the service you rely on goes away.

[dead]
Post reply on HN