61–70 of 308 posts
I've been working on Relay [0] (realtime multiplayer for Obsidian) and we're trying to follow tailscale's approach by separating out the compute/document sync from our auth control plane.
This means thats users still subscribe to our service (and help fund development) and do authn/authz through our service, but we can keep their data entirely private (we can't access it).
[0] https://relay.md
In theory, I love the local-first mode of building. It aligns well with “small tech” philosophy where privacy and data ownership are fundamental. In practice, it’s hard! You’re effectively responsible for building a sync engine, handling conflict resolution, managing schema migration, etc. This said, tools for local-first software development seem to have improved in the past couple years. I keep my eye on jazz.tools…
Along with the others mentioned, it's worth highlighting Yjs. It's an incredible CRDT toolkit that enables many of the realtime and async collaborative editing experience you want from local-first software. https://yjs.dev/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire thing is because of subscription revenue. It’s self reinforcing because those companies that get subscription revenue have both more revenue and higher valuations enabling more fund raising, causing them to beat out companies that do not follow this model. This is why local first software died.
I remember seeing somebody summarize this as "SaaS is a pricing model" or "SaaS is financialization" and it totally rings true. Compared to normal software pricing, a subscription gives you predictable recurring revenue and a natural sort of price discrimination (people who use your system more, pay more). It's also a psychological thing: folks got anchored on really low up-front prices for software, so paying $2000…
Personally, I disagree with this approach. This is trying to solve a business problem (I can't trust cloud-providers) with a technical trade-off (avoid centralized architecture). The problems with closed-source software (lack of control, lack of reliability) were solved with a new business model: open source development, which came with new licenses and new ways of getting revenue (maintenance contracts instead of li…
> This is trying to solve a business problem (I can't trust cloud-providers) with a technical trade-off (avoid centralized architecture). I don't think that's quite correct. I think the authors fully acknowledge that the business case for local-first is not complexly solved and is a closely related problem. These issues need both a business and technical solution, and the paper proposes a set of characteristics of wh…
And while they spend a lot of time on CRDTs as a technical solution, I didn't see any suggestions for business model solutions.
In fact, if we had a business model solution--particularly one where your data is not tied to a specific cloud-vendor--then decentralization would not be needed.
I get that they are trying to solve multiple problems with CDRTs (such a latency and offline support) but in my experience (we did this with Groove in the early 2000s) the trade-offs are too big for average users.
Tech has improved since then, of course, so maybe it will work this time.
That’s essentially what I’m trying to make widely available through my projects https://github.com/ibizaman/selfhostblocks and https://github.com/ibizaman/skarabox . Their shared goal is to make self-hosting more approachable to the masses. It’s based on NixOS to provide as much as possible out of the box and declaratively: https, SSO, LDAP, backups, ZFS w/ snapshots, etc. It’s a competitor to cloud hosting because i…
Also, so many of these selfhostable apps are web applications with a db, server and frontend, but for a lot of use cases (at least for me personally) you just use it on one machine and don't even need a "hosted" version or any kind of sync to another device. A completely local desktop program would suffice. For example I do personal accounting once a month on my computer – no need to have a web app running 24/7 somewhere else. I want to turn on the program, do my work, and then turn it off. While I can achieve that easily as a developer, most of the people can't. There seems to be a huge misalignment (for lack of a better word) between the amount of high-quality selfhostable FOSS alternatives and the amount of people that can actually use them. I think we need more projects like yours, where the goal is to close that gap.
I will definitely try to use selfhostblocks for a few things and try to contribute, keep it up!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire thing is because of subscription revenue. It’s self reinforcing because those companies that get subscription revenue have both more revenue and higher valuations enabling more fund raising, causing them to beat out companies that do not follow this model. This is why local first software died.
I remember seeing somebody summarize this as "SaaS is a pricing model" or "SaaS is financialization" and it totally rings true. Compared to normal software pricing, a subscription gives you predictable recurring revenue and a natural sort of price discrimination (people who use your system more, pay more). It's also a psychological thing: folks got anchored on really low up-front prices for software, so paying $2000…
Related: I've been incubating an idea for a while that open source, as it presently stands, is largely an ecosystem that exists in support of cloud SaaS. This is quite paradoxical because cloud SaaS is by far the least free model for software -- far, far less free than closed source commercial local software.
That’s essentially what I’m trying to make widely available through my projects https://github.com/ibizaman/selfhostblocks and https://github.com/ibizaman/skarabox . Their shared goal is to make self-hosting more approachable to the masses. It’s based on NixOS to provide as much as possible out of the box and declaratively: https, SSO, LDAP, backups, ZFS w/ snapshots, etc. It’s a competitor to cloud hosting because i…