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

Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 123 posts

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#111

Post by globular-toast »

bbor wrote: post #54
flankstaek wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually the L stands for Libre indicating full freedom of usage of the software and that is not just "free" as a price tag. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.en.html

Ok, this one’s baffling, especially learning at the end that FLOSS is bad because it’s meant to de -emphasize the “libre” part. All OSS software is inherently without cost, that seems unquestioned here. So free only ever means one thing to non-laypeople, in this context. So isn’t FOSS already the neutral middle ground between OSS and FS?? Regardless, I’m struggling to conceive of how a piece of software could be OS b…

Initially there was no Open Source or OSS. There was Free Software. This started a long time ago with things like GNU and later Linux, BSD etc. Richard Stallman codified what it meant for software to be Free. Specifically, it had nothing to do with cost. The "free" was free as in freedom, not free as in beer. Unfortunately English uses one word for both senses. Romance languages like Spanish still retain both: gratis means free as in beer and libre means free as in freedom.

Open Source was a later "rebranding" of free software by some people who fell out with Stallman and wanted to emphasise more the practical advantages over the ethical ones. Stallman wasn't happy because he felt (and still feels) the most important thing is that each person should be able to do computing freely.

Anyway, long story short, free software is nothing to do with cost. Horrible acronyms like "FLOSS" are to try to make everyone happy.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#112

Post by globular-toast »

bbor wrote: post #82
diggan wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All OSS software is inherently without cost, that seems unquestioned here. I don't think so, you could charge money for FOSS (like charging for a built binary but having the source be FOSS) and it'll still be as much FOSS as any other FOSS out there. It isn't very common to do so, but there isn't any inherently wrong or incorrect with charging for FOSS.

How could you charge for a binary if people can just compile it on their own...? Honor system? I guess you could make it inconvenient to compile, but then is that really OSS?

It's interesting to reflect on what you're saying: you'd pay someone who forces you to, but not otherwise. So if someone built a house for you you'd only pay them if they threatened to come and burn it down, or they kept some way to remotely lock you out of it?

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#113

Post by 0_____0 »

busymom0 wrote: post #99
0_____0 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you just need heart rate, you can pull data off a plain sensor to your phone or to a computer, they report over BLE.

What sensor would you recommend? I have tried Apple Watch and i really only care about the heart rate. But it doesn't poll the heart rate constantly unless in exercise mode. I wish I could just constantly track the heart rate every second.

I use the basic garmin chest strap. It transmits continuously and supports things like HRV, which I suspect is a secondary high data rate mode.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#114

Post by zekrioca »

yencabulator wrote: post #89
gchamonlive wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normally when talking about fitness tracking we are talking about embedded systems with very limited capacity both in terms of compute power and storage. You can use on-device storage to buffer tracking data, but any relevant and long term assessment and storage of the data has to be done off-site.

It's an Android/iOS app. On-device storage is measured in gigabytes, on-device CPU is very capable.

They are commenting about smaller devices such as a smart ring or a smart watch. Running a web server on such devices is the best way to deplete their battery.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#115

Post by [deleted] »

timmg wrote: post #17

Is there a missing "product" for [easy] "self-hosting" in the cloud? (Or does it exist? Or will it only apply to a narrow kind of user?) Like I think there should be some way to "one-button-click" install "self-hosted" apps in the cloud, tied to my personal account (and maybe with auth tied to that account). And I pay the usage fees for the cloud (hopefully on a per-request kind of basis, not an always-on server inst…

[deleted]

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#116

Post by dangravell »

NegativeK wrote: post #100
RobotToaster wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't most people interested in self hosting specifically to get away from the cloud?

I don't know if you can reasonably generalize self hosting. To a lot of people, self hosting is about getting complete (or effectively complete) control of your data and privacy. That can be compatible with the cloud.

Yes - and/or data sovereignty.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#118

Post by bbor »

globular-toast wrote: post #112
bbor wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could you charge for a binary if people can just compile it on their own...? Honor system? I guess you could make it inconvenient to compile, but then is that really OSS?

It's interesting to reflect on what you're saying: you'd pay someone who forces you to, but not otherwise. So if someone built a house for you you'd only pay them if they threatened to come and burn it down, or they kept some way to remotely lock you out of it?

Hmmm. Well it’s software/IP, so as always I think we need to stay away from “would you download a car” talk.

With that in mind, the proposition is basically just the honor system. Which maybe works a little sometimes, among professionals? I paid for SublimeText to support them, for example. But WinRar is a very compelling counter example.

It feels like publishing a pdf of a book but with a big red “don’t click this until you’ve Venmo’d me $5!” above it. Regardless of what I individually would do, that’s just kinda… goofy?

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#119

Post by theragra »

timmg wrote: post #17

Is there a missing "product" for [easy] "self-hosting" in the cloud? (Or does it exist? Or will it only apply to a narrow kind of user?) Like I think there should be some way to "one-button-click" install "self-hosted" apps in the cloud, tied to my personal account (and maybe with auth tied to that account). And I pay the usage fees for the cloud (hopefully on a per-request kind of basis, not an always-on server inst…

Several apps that try to solve this. Good one, but costly, is cloudron. It allows you to one click install a wide range of self-hosted apps. Cloudron itself is subscription software that can be installed on own server or many cloud options.

There are many more, though. Things like proxmox with app stores, which are easily installed in most clouds.

Also CasaOs and others.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#120

Post by theragra »

zsoltkacsandi wrote: post #39
timmg wrote: post #17

Is there a missing "product" for [easy] "self-hosting" in the cloud? (Or does it exist? Or will it only apply to a narrow kind of user?) Like I think there should be some way to "one-button-click" install "self-hosted" apps in the cloud, tied to my personal account (and maybe with auth tied to that account). And I pay the usage fees for the cloud (hopefully on a per-request kind of basis, not an always-on server inst…

I was thinking of building a self-hosted app framework that manages the application lifecycle like how smartphones do. The only problem is that the existing apps wouldn't work with it.

Cloudron solves this going from the other side: they package apps themselves. To support transparent migrations and backups.
Post reply on HN