Live data from Hacker News

Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

cloudinabottle.org

201–210 of 342 posts

Re: Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

#201

There seems to be a lot of variance between stated and revealed preferences around self-hosting. It often seems like presenting the image of being autonomous to our peers seems more important than actually achieving it. It takes a lot of energy to replicate what AWS and friends have done once we factor in concerns like the passage of time and entropy. I've never been able to keep a media/NAS appliance alive for much…

Yep, even with something like NextCloud or ownCloud it gets tiring pretty fast. I do get the appeal of handling everything on your own, but it also brings any of the downside of handling everything by myself. I just need a working cloud storage with sync, redundancy, and availability. Can I get it up to spec? Definitely but it will cost more both in time and money than getting OOTB solution.

I gave up sync and availability for sensitive data to at-rest encryption. Mundane photos/documents can stay on Google Drive, for now. I wish there's a better solution.

Re: Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

#202
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just giving the LLM the ssh keys and having at it. It’s pretty good. I'm mostly fine letting AI write code because its easily auditable and you can follow changes through the Git history. Whereas, it you let the AI go free on a server, you mostly have no idea what it did and where, so it's quite hard to audit and even harder to try and fix things. So, unless relying on a declarative paradigm like NixOS does, I'm no…

Admittedly this was not my castle. More of a $1.5/mo shed that I got just to try this.

That's a cheap shed, what's the provider and spec?

Re: Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are also characterizing another project that was open-sourced (sandstorm) and is under active development as "long abandoned". Open source is difficult and requires a fair amount of cheerleading to engage users and make them part of the community. As a result it's hard to see your project in a positive light.

They also called out Sandstorm for requiring changes to the applications for them to run on the platform.

Which is true. There's no issue with honest criticism, but when it's careless or disingenuous then it it's a put reflection on the speaker.

Re: Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

#204
post #161
post #50

These guys have been spamming issues in repos trying to promote this project and no disclosure whatsoever that they are associated with the project. https://github.com/search?q=%22cloudinabottle.toml%22&type=i...

It's evidence of bad abstraction if you need everyone else to make changes and couple themselves directly to you. If for some reason your services can't speak an already common language, I think it's on you to add those shims into your own project.

I don't think this approach is bad. The issues are asking if the project will accept contributions to add support, not demanding the maintainers add it.

Let's assume that they didn't have these container restrictions and could just use an ordinary docker-compose.yml, they'd still probably want to use something like OAuth2.0 for centralised login which a lot of these services won't have.

What would be better, making a massive PR to add support for it, or opening an issue to discuss it with the maintainer first?

Re: Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

#206
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because "perfectly legal" and "socially acceptable" often diverge quite a bit. The world would be quite miserable if "perfectly legal" would be what everyone optimizes for.

[flagged]

This feels like something derailing, ragebaiting and not contributing to this platform tbh.

Re: Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

#207
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How does being docker compose based make it inaccessible? Because it requires people to also have knowledge about the ins and outs of docker and docker compose. If we are talking about web applications it is yet another layer that has been added over the years. It used to be that you could fairly easily host most things on a old fashioned lamp host (I am talking decades ago) and all you had to know was basic file t…

> you could fairly easily host most things on a old fashioned lamp host (I am talking decades ago) and all you had to know was basic file transferring Setting up and maintaining a server is easier today than it was decades ago, A LAMP at this time meant a lot of manual setup, IaC wasn't a thing, reproducibility wasn't a goal, versioning was confidential, documentation was scarce and often outdated, out of the box sec…

> Setting up and maintaining a server is easier today than it was decades ago, A LAMP at this time meant a lot of manual setup, IaC wasn't a thing, reproducibility wasn't a goal, versioning was confidential, documentation was scarce and often outdated, out of the box security was lower, ties to the OS were higher. Managing virtual hosts was clunky, updating OS/PHP was risky. I would not go back for anything.

You are speeding past my point by a mile or two. With a shared webhost you get a ready lamp stack. In the late 90s early 2000s you could fairly easily get a wide array of software running that way. All you had to do is create a database in the hosters control panel, upload the package and you'd be on your way. Later in the 2000s one click installers came along for popular packages making it even easier. In fact, they are still around these days making it extremely easy to install a wide array of lamp based applications to these days.

There are very few options these days to get started as easily these days with modern non lamp tech stacks. The only thing I am familiar with (other than the product presented to us in this post) is pikapods, [which only offers a limited selection of available applications](https://www.pikapods.com/apps). There are a few others, also catalog based, though they more seem to focus on deploying on other platforms for you. Other than that you start to quickly move to more complex hosting solutions aimed at business and scaling. Or platforms that are cloud platforms with all the added complexity to navigate and figure out before you can deploy docker containers. Not to mention ridiculous situation that a few of the ones I know about have pivoted to being "agentic compute providers" whatever that means and certainly will confuse a novice. Which means that the "practical" advice given is often to "just" set up a VPS. And yes, many VPS providers will provide an image with docker enabled, but that is just the start.

> Rootless being the proper way to setup Docker is a highly controversial take. You will mostly get added complexity and a false sentiment of security from it.

That, in fact, is another layer of complexity people will then have to figure out. Most information I am aware of these days does claim that it is better to run containers rootless or at the very least make sure the user in the container is non root. The fact that we are both convinced of the opposite tells you how confusing it must be for a novice.

The overall point I am trying to make isn't even about the exact details. It is that for hosting something these days there is much more required surrounding knowledge required before you can get started in most cases.

Re: Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

#208
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(author here) I'm checking with my team to confirm these came from us, but if so I apologize for this - posts like these should come from a real account with proper disclosure, but also these sorts of requests feel premature for a project like ours that doesn't yet have a sizeable user base.

> posts like these should come from a real account with proper disclosure This line makes me think you are running a spam campaign and andrew just isn't part of it

If this is a spam campaign, it’s not a very effective one. I think you’d do well to apply Hanlon’s Razor here

Re: Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

#209
post #6

I think the time for this space is here. The appetite to depart from subscriptions and loaning your personal data to ad/ai companies is stronger than ever. Currently, a lot of this space is docker compose based and simply inaccessible to so many who may otherwise be interested. Whether or not it's this project or another, I hope something gathers enough steam soon to truly break the barriers to entry.

The biggest difficulty is probably that from my observation, there's a sharp cutoff line somewhere between Gen Y and Z where anyone born before that (and don't work in tech) genuinely have no idea how to navigate their digital life and gets preyed on by those subscriptions. And these people are still a super large portion of the population paying for those subscriptions. Only Gen Z and later are starting to care and…

> Only Gen Z and later are starting to care and willing to spend the time and effort to self host.

I'm not sure what you are seeing, but what I'm seeing is widespread teach illiteracy in Gen Z outside of their smartphone. Gen Z and younger mostly grew up with smartphones as their primary devices and with little contact with a laptop or desktop computer (and even then confined 99% to browser usage).

Re: Cloud in a Bottle: making self-hosting accessible to everyone

#210
post #191

In the age of LLM agents, still going for Docker/Podmam on anything besides local development box seems like a weird choice. Docker has poor tooling for network level security between the containers, has issues with different runtimes per container, etc. It is just a bit primitive if you want to expose multiple services to the internet on the same server. One of those apps will get compromised and then all the others…

> Docker has poor tooling for network level security between the containers

Aha so LLMs have better tooling for network level security, cloudboy?

Post reply on HN