This article points to a common misconception around self-hosting.
-
This article points to a common misconception around self-hosting.
The author tries hosting at home for a few weeks, & proclaims it is not the way. They then go on to argue for community managed server infrastructure instead (which is very much self-hosting).
Self-hosting does not solely refer to home-hosting ('on-prem'), nor sole owner-operator. It scales up to server infra in a datacenter, run & governed by those using it
So yes, the future is very much #selfhosted!
https://www.drewlyton.com/story/the-future-is-not-self-hosted/
-
This article points to a common misconception around self-hosting.
The author tries hosting at home for a few weeks, & proclaims it is not the way. They then go on to argue for community managed server infrastructure instead (which is very much self-hosting).
Self-hosting does not solely refer to home-hosting ('on-prem'), nor sole owner-operator. It scales up to server infra in a datacenter, run & governed by those using it
So yes, the future is very much #selfhosted!
https://www.drewlyton.com/story/the-future-is-not-self-hosted/
-
@JulianOliver agreed. Sounds like Drew is a newb.
Hmm, sounds to me like Drew is using "self-hosting" in to mean something along the lines of people running their own infrastructure, instead of using a service they don't control themselves. Julian is using self-hosting to also include services on infrastructure that's run and governed by by the community. Drew's definition is the one on Wikipedia so I don't see it as just a "newb thing".
-
Hmm, sounds to me like Drew is using "self-hosting" in to mean something along the lines of people running their own infrastructure, instead of using a service they don't control themselves. Julian is using self-hosting to also include services on infrastructure that's run and governed by by the community. Drew's definition is the one on Wikipedia so I don't see it as just a "newb thing".
@thenexusofprivacy @noplasticshower Nowhere in the WP page does it restrict to home hosting. The WP definition is very broad, as is the term in wide use
'Private' servers can be remote:
"The practice of self-hosting web services became more feasible with the development of cloud computing and virtualization technologies, which enabled users to run their own servers on remote hardware or virtual machines."
Drew is solely talking about one type of selfhosting, 'on-prem'
-
@thenexusofprivacy @noplasticshower Nowhere in the WP page does it restrict to home hosting. The WP definition is very broad, as is the term in wide use
'Private' servers can be remote:
"The practice of self-hosting web services became more feasible with the development of cloud computing and virtualization technologies, which enabled users to run their own servers on remote hardware or virtual machines."
Drew is solely talking about one type of selfhosting, 'on-prem'
Drew's arguing for "publicly funded, accessible, at cost cloud-services", provided by the government at the community level. "Imagine a world where your library card includes 100GB of encrypted file storage, photo-sharing and document collaboration tools, and media streaming services."
It's true that even Wikipedia talks about people running their own servers on the remote hardware or virtual machines, but that's not what I see Drew proposing.
Anyhow, reasonable minds differ, if what Drew's proposing fits in with your definition of self-hosting I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. My point to @noplasticshower was that it's over-simplifying to dismiss this as Drew being a newb, there really is a difference of opinions here, and the best way to understand it is to look at the different definitions of self-hosting.
-
Drew's arguing for "publicly funded, accessible, at cost cloud-services", provided by the government at the community level. "Imagine a world where your library card includes 100GB of encrypted file storage, photo-sharing and document collaboration tools, and media streaming services."
It's true that even Wikipedia talks about people running their own servers on the remote hardware or virtual machines, but that's not what I see Drew proposing.
Anyhow, reasonable minds differ, if what Drew's proposing fits in with your definition of self-hosting I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. My point to @noplasticshower was that it's over-simplifying to dismiss this as Drew being a newb, there really is a difference of opinions here, and the best way to understand it is to look at the different definitions of self-hosting.
@thenexusofprivacy @noplasticshower
It's great that Drew's having a crack at the topic. However their take does point to someone writing from privilege, & misses a key dimension of self-hosting.
They describe a choice between tech feudalism, host at home, & publicly funded infrastructure.
This faux choice overlooks an existing & thriving scene of non-publicly-funded self-hosted infra run by communities themselves, free of interaction with the state. In some cases, it's for their survival.
-
@thenexusofprivacy @noplasticshower
It's great that Drew's having a crack at the topic. However their take does point to someone writing from privilege, & misses a key dimension of self-hosting.
They describe a choice between tech feudalism, host at home, & publicly funded infrastructure.
This faux choice overlooks an existing & thriving scene of non-publicly-funded self-hosted infra run by communities themselves, free of interaction with the state. In some cases, it's for their survival.
I agree that Drew created a false dichotomy by not talking about non-state community-hosted infrastructure, and in retrospect wish I had said that in my first post!
But I was really just talking about the terminology here. My first response was a reaction to how you described Drew's argument in your original post:
"They then go on to argue for community managed server infrastructure instead (which is very much self-hosting)."
Which I took as you saying that Drew's specific proposal of accounts provided by libraries (state-run, governed at the local level) should be considered self-hosting. And maybe it should! But I can also see why people -- even those who aren't newbies -- would say that no, government-provided accounts are not self-hosted.
Anyhow, terminology aside I think we're generally in agreement on the issues. I didn't actually reshare the article because I saw the title as clickbait, and while I agree very much about the value of community hosting, I thought it did a disservice by only focusing on local government-provided hosting as the alternative. So, sorry for wasting your time with the discussion!
-
I agree that Drew created a false dichotomy by not talking about non-state community-hosted infrastructure, and in retrospect wish I had said that in my first post!
But I was really just talking about the terminology here. My first response was a reaction to how you described Drew's argument in your original post:
"They then go on to argue for community managed server infrastructure instead (which is very much self-hosting)."
Which I took as you saying that Drew's specific proposal of accounts provided by libraries (state-run, governed at the local level) should be considered self-hosting. And maybe it should! But I can also see why people -- even those who aren't newbies -- would say that no, government-provided accounts are not self-hosted.
Anyhow, terminology aside I think we're generally in agreement on the issues. I didn't actually reshare the article because I saw the title as clickbait, and while I agree very much about the value of community hosting, I thought it did a disservice by only focusing on local government-provided hosting as the alternative. So, sorry for wasting your time with the discussion!
-
@thenexusofprivacy @noplasticshower Not a waste of time at all. This was a good thread!
Oh good, glad you feel that way ... thanks for the discussion!
