Earlier quoted context omitted.
How come that a public library , one of the earliest examples of centralized information infrastructure, is not an example of outsourcing and relinquishing control? Instead of your own (small) books collection you get to use some external (huge) book collection. But now you only can borrow a physical book, or some recorded media. You have to return it, and making a copy for personal use only is still a bit problemati…
> Either you own and control something, or you do not, there's no third option. I think there's a full spectrum you're missing. You can own something with other people, and your level of control can be continuous, not discrete & binary. For example, my public library is funded by my local government, which I can influence with lobbying and voting. I can join the board of the library, and I can just go and talk to the…
The future is not self-hosted
311–320 of 459 posts
Re: The future is not self-hosted
#312Moxie 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! Here in Spain there is a network of web libraries that are proxies of your corresponding local library that allow lending as long as you have a library card. You even have magazines and newspapers, I know because I developed such network!
Re: The future is not self-hosted
#313What. 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…
Re: The future is not self-hosted
#314To me, the major issue of self-hosting (once overcome the tech barrier etc...) has always been protection. Not from external actors or attacks, but from incidents. By which I mean backups. Safest option is online backup, which is expensive and takes your data sovereignty away once again. Or I can once a year make a hard copy and take it to my parents (who live in a different country) for storage, and swap the backups…
Re: The future is not self-hosted
#315I’m never clear why the solution I have - a kind of hybrid of cloud and local - isn’t more popular. I make use of google drive, apps and google photos and therefore suffer the knowledge that my stuff is probably being used to train AI (I’m personally comfortable with this) - but then I have local backups and sync for everything. InsycHQ gives me a locally (and NAS) backed up version of all my documents, I also backup…
Re: The future is not self-hosted
#316I like self hosting . It’s not just about privacy or owning something. To me a homelab is also a hobby. No different than previous generations that tinkered with their cars as a hobby. As someone who works in IT - there are also ancillary benefits. What I learn at work, I apply to my home lab and vice versa.
Re: The future is not self-hosted
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Self hosting and community collaboration need to be incompatible. Totally agree, but there's a lot more nuance here. Giving each friend an account on my server would require it be exposed to the public internet which is difficult to manage securely. And SSO doesn't really make this very convenient because that means everyone would have to sign in and sync to everyone's servers which is a lot of work for the user. I…
Right, the services should allow federation, but that doesn't mean you need to federate with the entire world . You and your friend should be able to just click "invite" in your "My Home" app to get a link to text to each other like `myhome://invite?domain= .services.frienddomain.com` (or a QR code flow). Under that TLD you have well-known subdomains and TXT records for e.g. wireguard config, oauth server location, e…
Re: The future is not self-hosted
#318It's interesting to me that recently people have started equating self hosting with having a physical server in your house. Beyond that, the "how do I talk to other people if it's on my server" thing is generally solvable. Give them an account on your server. Don't want to need to make an account on every friend's server? That's why we have SSO technologies. I don't think. Self hosting and community collaboration nee…
> It's interesting to me that recently people have started equating self hosting with having a physical server in your house. LOL right. I bought an ereader that works for me instead of working for Amazon. No need to run a server.
Re: The future is not self-hosted
#319Future is, unfortunately, probably getting back to piracy in some shape or form. Especially with the general idea of the industry that buying something does not mean you own it. In that case all I can say is: F'em. It is definitely true that piracy is primarily a service problem, not an ethical one.
Re: The future is not self-hosted
#320There are different kinds of self-hosting. Sure, you can own your server and have it at home. It must be nice to have enough space at home to dedicate some to a server room (servers are noisy btw). But many people live in small apartments in a city and so don't have that luxury. You can own your server but rent some rack space from a data center to put it into. That would still be self-hosting. You can rent a virtual…