Live data from Hacker News

The future is not self-hosted

drewlyton.com

301–310 of 459 posts

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#301
post #288
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

This is why I think archive sites will be attacked by the powers that would like information to disappear when they want it to.

Perhaps they'll use a warped interpretation of copyright law to do it, or maybe something even more draconian like censorship laws with a punishment for publishing banned information.

Could they do it, technically? Not unless they controlled the entire world's networks, including those of countries with competing aims. Would that stop them from trying? As we've seen with the endless attacks on end to end encryption, I'm sure they'd give it a shot.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#302
It sounds like the author never heard of a VPS? Yes it's someone else's computer but you own the contents, can switch providers any time.

Personally no I would never host cloud connected stuff at home, but neither would I trust Dropbox or Kindle with my stuff. Although actually why ebooks need to be in the cloud at all I don't know - just buy somewhere that lets you download and keep them on your device/backup storage? If my eBook reader ever said I couldn't side load books I would hack it so fast..

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#303

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…

> 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 change absent a profound crisis in all of the above simultaneously (y’know, like what the USA is doing atm).

That has not been my understanding. My understanding is that privacy, security, and sovereignty costs money and most people and businesses find that cost to be too high. At other times they also dont realize what they are trading off for.

My aunt in the city didn't understanding why I needed a rifle and would vote for no guns policy in the state. When she visited me and we had a coyote incident one night, she understood.

My friends in the city didn't understanding why I have my own well, septic tank and chickens. To them it's a lot of work (it is!) for no good reason, until COVID happened, and they struggled to purchase bottled water, plumbing backed up a few days and food prices shot through the roof.

It's all about cost-benefit analysis. My ex-coworker ex-NSA carries only cash and a rooted Android. I dont - although I am aware of a lot of the risks he's hedging against, in part because that too is a lot of effort that I cannot handle right now.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#304
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…

Docker has kida solved the "run application" issue. The real stuff most people care about is the data those applications manage.

If you don't realize what this means (and I won't fault you for it) just imagine what would happen if the $300 hardware and storage were burned down in a house fire or stolen by a burglar.

I self host and have offsite backups on rsync.net and a sneakernet network of people where we exchange a few TBs of encrypted storage with one another to hedge this risk but even then there are scenarios where we could lose valuable data.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#305

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…

Poppin' in just to say thank you for your reading, commenting and inspiring such a thoughtful and interesting discussion!

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#306
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Docker is still too complex for the layman, and that's ultimately who we have to win over anyway. Big Tech makes it super easy to surrender privacy and sovereignty by giving them your e-mail and a password to create an account and use a new thing. Apps make it easy to do the same, but now for your physical location and device identifiers as well. Until setting up a private chatroom for your family is as easy as downl…

> Until setting up a private chatroom for your family is as easy as downloading an app on your phone

It already is - all my family and close friends are on our own Mattermost instance but it still has them have the same social apps everyone else has because two degrees out are not on our own Mattermost instance :)

This is absolutely ok! As the cost of providing a service becomes less subsidized and starts to reflect the true cost to service a user, more and more people are going to self-host. Hopefully federated networks take off then.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#307

It sounds like the author never heard of a VPS? Yes it's someone else's computer but you own the contents, can switch providers any time. Personally no I would never host cloud connected stuff at home, but neither would I trust Dropbox or Kindle with my stuff. Although actually why ebooks need to be in the cloud at all I don't know - just buy somewhere that lets you download and keep them on your device/backup storag…

Yeah, I chose to ignore the VPS angle because I feel like it presents essentially the same problems as self-hosting – just on rented hardware. It didn't really serve the story. But I get that omitting this makes it confusing for more tech-savvy readers. I use a VPS with Dokploy for hosting apps, but I don't know if I'd use it to host my photo library haha

Also, I'm actually working on jailbreaking my Kindle and will probably write a future article about that! Thanks for reading and commenting!

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#308
post #222

I actually thought a lot about this, and I feel it relates to my job in health services. I'm tired of hearing the Norwegian government talk about AI and modernization. Before we chase the next big trend, we need to solve fundamental problems. We should have one public, centralized provider for digital identity and authentication. We also need a single, secure messaging service for healthcare personnel and residents.…

Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment! I think this is a great path to fight for. I think it's very funny that most people (in the U.S. at least) scoff whenever I talk about a "public, centralized provider for digital identity". There's so much governmental distrust. Meanwhile, everyone I know logs in with Google. Have a great day and thanks for reading!

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#309

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…

> 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.

I dunno, when Roald Dahl e-books auto-updated to censored versions with no way to rollback it did feel distinctly dystopian.

If you think beyond kids, when a certain book is ruled illegal in a certain country it will disappear from internet-connected devices overnight. Seizing physical copies from people's homes is orders of magnitude harder.

Re: The future is not self-hosted

#310

Moxie Marlinspike nailed this in his web3 critique from a couple years ago: "People don't want to run their own servers, and never will. The premise for web1 was that everyone on the internet would be both a publisher and consumer of content as well as infrastructure... However – and I don't think this can be emphasized enough – that is not what people want." That said, the discussion seems stuck in a false binary be…

Exactly! Thanks for your comment! I actually propose what you recommend being provided through libraries at the end of the article. Libraries rules!
Post reply on HN