Comment on Installing **self-hostable** services on a cloud server isn't self-hosting ???
talentedkiwi@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
In my opinion, it’s (the service) self-hosted and not home-hosted.
Well, yes, but its physical location does make a difference. Having the bits that make up the backup of your life’s memories in the other room vs in some company’s datacenter who knows where is not the same thing.
(Not saying that running your own services on rented “cloud” hardware is inferior, I also do that)
Yes Physical Locations matter a lot. But in both ways. I habe Backups in at Home and in the Cloud. Both Locations can get destroyed but ITS unliklry that both get destroy. Another Faktor ist Internet Connection. If your Internet Connection ist Dual Stack lite, you cant Access your Home Network via ipv4 or hast a very low bandwith. And with ssh its irrelevant If the Server ist 2 Meters from me or 20km.
I can agree with this. My internet is trash, and I refuse to go with the faster provider in the area on principle (they took municipal funds to bring faster internet in the mid 2000s and didn’t do a thing until over a decade later), so I can’t feasibly share anything outside of my household users. I’m seriously considering setting up some hosted services if I can’t get fiber when I’ve nailed down my setup. I’d rather host everything at home, but I’d much rather offer my relatives access to something that isn’t selling their info to anyone with a checkbook. If I’m maintaining it and I’m the one who can accidentally lose everyone’s stuff with a bad command, I’m self-hosting it.
Thank you. I was thinking the same thing. Some things it makes sense to host in your home. Things like large media, home automation, etc. Some things it doesn’t. Like DNS, service that require large amounts of egress (most home internet is very asymmetric), anything with a more public face.
Generally it boils down to privacy and reliability. If it’s private, keep it home. If it needs more reliability, put it on a VPS.
My home hardware is just not reliable enough to host something critical. I have redundant systems but it might take a bit to get stuff back.
This idea of it not being self hosted because it’s on somebody else’s computer is just weird.
I put my uptime kuma on the VPS to monitor my home infrastructure from the outside. Let’s me know when things go down much more reliably.
This idea of it not being** self** hosted because it’s on somebody else’s computer is just weird.
I am running the software. I set it up. I maintain it. I can change it to whatever I want. It is therefore self-hosted.
Right. Then if this would have been locally hosted, it’s like complaining about the service of their electricity company or ISP. Could similarly be reasonably considered on- or offtopic. But I think this sub is more in the spirit of “there is no cloud, just someone elses computer”. I’m with mod on this one.
Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
This is a great way to say it. I feel the same. You put the same effort in regardless where it comes from.