this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
-22 points (33.3% liked)

Selfhosted

40347 readers
311 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ptz@dubvee.org 44 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

I've self hosted long before the privacy/subscription nightmare of modern cloud/SaaS platforms was a thing. I do it because I enjoy it (and at the time I got started, I had crap internet so having good local services like offline Wikipedia was important).

Not everyone has to self-host. I run lots of services, mostly for myself, but friends and family who don't know a kernel driver from a school bus driver also use them. So the expectation that everyone self host is and always has been "pie in the sky". And that's okay.

Privacy regulations are all fine and dandy, but even with the strictest ones in place, you still do not own or control your data. You're still subscribing to services instead of owning software. You can't extend, modify, or customize hosted software. Self hosting FOSS applications addresses all of those.

So rather than expect everyone to self-host, we should be working towards communities offering services to one another, pooling resources, and letting those interoperate with each other.

To make fun of an old moral panic in the 90s: "It's 11pm. Do you know where your data is?" Yep, it's down the street in Matt's house.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Right. I think the real vision isn't that every single person self-hosts, but every community has somebody in it who does the self-hosting for the community. Everybody can be independent like villages instead of totally centralized like empires

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Privacy regulations are all fine and dandy, but even with the strictest ones in place,

They're also subject to interpretation, regulatory capture, as well as just plain being ignored when it's sufficiently convenient for the regulators to do so.

"There ought to be a law!" is nice, but it's not a solution when there's a good couple of centuries of modern regulatory frameworks having had existed, and a couple centuries of endless examples of where absolutely none of it matters when sufficient money and power is in play.

Like, for example, the GDPR: it made a lot of shit illegal under penalty of company-breaking penalties.

So uh, nobody in the EU has had their personal data misused since it was passed? And all the big data brokers that are violating it have been fined out of business?

And this is, of course, ignoring the itty bitty little fact that you have to be aware of the misuse of the data: if some dude does some shady shit quietly, then well, nobody knows it happened to even bring action?

[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Exactly. I'm just here to say that regulation isn't a solution to corporate malfeasance - at best it is a patch until the corp lawyers figure out where the loopholes are or how to accomplish the malfeasance in a different way.

[–] cron 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I can and do self host, but I'm not willing to provide these services for free. I don't want to be responsible for other peoples passwords or family photos.

Thats where good, privacy-respecting services come into play. Instead of hosting for my neighbours, I would recommend mailbox.org, bitwarden, ente or a hosted nextcloud.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

That's okay, too.

For me, I only let people I know use them (friends and family) with the exception of my Lemmy instance, of course (and even that's not wide open to the world).

I'd be running these for myself whether anyone else used them or not. Unless I'm hosting for hundreds of people, the cost to run these services is the same as it is just for myself. Granted, I don't have people gaming the system trying to backup their entire PCs to their email inbox or Nextcloud, but that's where the trust factor (and storage quotas) comes in.

As far as being responsible for all that goes, again, the small audience of people I know personally lets me explain that it's all "best effort". That said, I do take my own backups and high availability seriously and they benefit from that.

[–] tux0r 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Note that you don’t know what the hosters know, store and/or sell about you.

[–] cron 2 points 2 days ago

There is no way to be 100% sure, but:

  • bitwarden and ente have open source clients that ecrypt all data locally in a way that the provider can't restore data
  • nextcloud isn't optimal, while you can encypt data at rest, the provider might be able to spy on you
  • With mail providers it is difficult, but mailbox.org has my (personal) trust by building their business model on data protection and open source