this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
2373 points (99.1% liked)

Selfhosted

40054 readers
954 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
[–] spez@sh.itjust.works 71 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

Self hosted

Cloud provided media storage

[–] ericjmorey@programming.dev 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] darelik@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Don't threaten me with a good time

[–] dan@upvote.au 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It could be their own cloud. I refer to my VPSes as "the cloud" even though that's still self-hosting.

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

No one else uses the term "cloud" like that.

That part of this comic really stuck out like a sore thumb. I can't tell if it's an oversight, a comment about the challenges of self-hosting, or subtle mockery of self-hosting hypocrisy.

[–] dan@upvote.au 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No one else uses the term "cloud" like that

Broadly, "the cloud" is just someone else's computer. VPSes still fall into that definition. A lot of VPS providers describe themselves as "cloud" now too (eg one of the main hosts I use, HostHatch, describes themselves that way on their site).

If a single EC2 server (which is essentially just a VPS in one region) is considered to be "in the cloud", why not a much cheaper, more powerful server with a different provider?

[–] lefixxx@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] dan@upvote.au 2 points 1 year ago

My interpretation of "cloud provided media storage" in the context of self-hosting is something like seaweedfs.

[–] kadotux@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago

I use "my personal cloud" all the time. But that's just me.

[–] A10@kerala.party 1 points 1 year ago

I got another one. Self hosted but tunneled through cloudflare

[–] DrQuint@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

This counts as discussion of self-hosting.

[–] csolisr@communities.azkware.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My case is a variant of that - I used to host on a VPS, but the storage available was extremely expensive for, say, more than 16 GB. Tired of having to trim data literally daily, I went and purchased a home server with all the storage I would need. The problem? My home internet, being residential, is behind CG-NAT (not even a dynamic IP!), and that means renting a (much cheaper) VPS solely to expose my server to the open internet with a static IP.

[–] dan@upvote.au 1 points 1 year ago

For exposing your server to the internet, a $10/year 512MB RAM VPS would be more than enough. You can also get VPSes with way more storage for a reasonable price, especially during Black Friday. The VPS I'm hosting Lemmy and Mastodon on has 99GB disk space and is only $33/year, but that was part of a limited sale.