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

CLI agents make self-hosting on a home server easier and fun

fulghum.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 570 posts

Re: CLI agents make self-hosting on a home server easier and fun

#321

Post by compounding_it »

I don't really understand this post completely.

>I am spending time using software, learning, and having fun - instead of maintaining it and stressing out about it.

Using software, learning and having fun with with what? everything is being done by Claude here. The part of fun and learning is to learn to use and maintain it in the first place. How will you learn anything if Claude is doing everything for you ? You are not understand how things work and where everything goes.

This post could be written or at least modified by an LLM, but more importantly I think this person is completely missing the point of self hosting and learning.

Re: CLI agents make self-hosting on a home server easier and fun

#322

Post by teiferer »

csomar wrote: post #283

Vibe-setting up a home network server with VaultWarden is beyond reckless. LLMs have tendency to overlook security in order to get things working. You are, thereby, exposing your passwords (and potentially your 2FA as bitwarden supports that) to the whole world. This is beyond stupid. Even before LLMs my main concern with setting up BitWarden on my own server was two folds: security and availability. LLMs doesn't fix…

Vibe-maintaining is even worse than vibe-setting up.

And ironically all in the name of "self hosting". Claude code defies both words in that.

Re: CLI agents make self-hosting on a home server easier and fun

#323

Post by johnisgood »

wiether wrote: post #313
johnisgood wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but "people" here are alleged software engieners. It is quite disheartening.

First and foremost they are humans, with a limited time on Earth. Being a software engineer doesn't mean you want to spend you free time tinkering about your self-hosting setup and doing support for your users. With Tailscale, not only you don't have to care about most things since _it just works_, but also on-boarding of casual users is straightforward. Same goes for Plex. I want to watch movies/shows, I don't want…

There is a difference between "I choose not to" and "I cannot". The thread is full of people saying Tailscale "unlocked" self-hosting, implying capability, not time savings or time preference.

Choosing convenience is fine. But if basic port forwarding or WireGuard is beyond someone's skill set, "software engineer" is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

I am not saying they are, but if it really is the case, then yeah.

As for file sharing... I remember when non-SWEs knew how to torrent movies, used DC++ and so on. These days even SWEs have no idea how to do it. It is mind-boggling.

Re: CLI agents make self-hosting on a home server easier and fun

#326

Post by hmontazeri »

Love this. I run also all my stuff by myself and I’m not an infra expert by all means just know enough to self host my app and services. I also built an remote monitoring agent using Go and rails I call it https://bareagent.io which monitors servers, docker containers and sends notifications when in any of those containers an error occurres as it is attached to the container logs

Re: CLI agents make self-hosting on a home server easier and fun

#327

Post by timc3 »

seszett wrote: post #263
byb wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My biggest source of paranoia is my open home assistant port, while it requires a strong password and is TLS-encrypted, I'm sure that one day someone will find an exploit letting them in, and then the attacker will rapidly turn my smart home devices on and off until they break/overheat the power components until they start a fire and burn down my house.

That seems like a very irrational fear. Attackers don't go around trying to break into Home Assistant to turn the lights on at some stranger's house. There's also no particular reason to think Home Assistant's authentication has to have a weakness point. And your devices are also unlikely to start a fire just by being turned on and off, if that's your fear you should replace them at once because if they catch fire it…

People are putting their whole infrastructure onto HA - cars, Apple/Google/other accounts, integrations to grid companies, managing ESP software etc..

I think that has more potential for problems than turning lights on and off and warrants strong security.

Re: CLI agents make self-hosting on a home server easier and fun

#329

Post by pixelbyindex »

I also started started experimenting with self-hosting in the last few years. Started with a simple Plex server, then gradually evolved my little setup into a handful of open-source apps that now cover most of what I use during my day to day.

There are a few important things to consider, like unstable IPs, home internet limits, and the occasional power issue. Cloud providers felt overpriced for what I needed, especially once storage was factored in.

In the end, I put together a small business where people can run their own Mac mini with a static IP: https://www.minimahost.com/

I’m continuing to work on it while keeping my regular software job. So far, the demand is not very high, or perhaps I am not great at marketing XD

Re: CLI agents make self-hosting on a home server easier and fun

#330

Post by arjie »

drnick1 wrote: post #26
simonw wrote: post #3

This posts lists inexpensive home servers, Tailscale and Claude Code as the big unlocks. I actually think Tailscale may be an even bigger deal here than sysadmin help from Claude Code at al. The biggest reason I had not to run a home server was security: I'm worried that I might fall behind on updates and end up compromised. Tailscale dramatically reduces this risk, because I can so easily configure it so my own devi…

I'd rather expose a Wireguard port and control my keys than introduce a third party like Tailscale. I am not sure why people are so afraid of exposing ports. I have dozens of ports open on my server including SMTP, IMAP(S), HTTP(S), various game servers and don't see a problem with that. I can't rule out a vulnerability somewhere but services are containerized and/or run as separate UNIX users. It's the way the Inter…

I used to do that, but Tailscale with your own headscale server is pretty snazzy. The other thing is with cloudflared running your server doesn't have to be Internet-routable. Everything is tunneled.
Post reply on HN