• Omnipitaph@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    This guy didn’t want to do the leg work of emailing his photos to his friends, and declares self-hosting isn’t the solution to a social net? I totally see the point in community hosting, in fact I’m all for that.

    But really? You don’t have to make your servers public facing, you just white-list the people you want to see your stuff and make sure to organize your drives with public and private pages.

    He went through all that and didn’t take it far enough.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      emailing his photos to his friends

      that’s sometimes difficult, e.g. when you have thousands of photos, and emails have a size limit of 20 MB per email. using matrix chat or sth is also not ideal since the other side will have to download images one-by-one. sending a zip file might work, but the matrix protocol might have a size limit for attachments.

      an FTP server might work. also consider that you want to store the images somewhere, not just send them once. how do you do that with messaging services?

      • Omnipitaph@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        I feel like I covered my bases with the rest of my comment there. If you have thousands of photos that you want to share, host them on your server and whitelist the people you want to see them :/

        IRL I’ve never sent nor received more than a handful of pics at a time, and always through email. It would have never occurred to me that people are out there sending the whole family collection to each other digitally. Grandma hordes those pics for a reason; as leverage for people to visit her!

  • ehxor@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Companies like Amazon have been playing dirty with Digital Rights Management (DRM) since the Internet’s inception.

    False. They came along after the fact and sullied the waters, then lobbied to make it illegal to tinker with the DRM locks, then got richer than God.

  • drkt@scribe.disroot.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    I agree with the premise that selfhosting is not something the layman can or want to do, but the assumption that self-hosters only host software that serve themselves is very, very dumb, and clearly comes from the mouth of someone who self-hosts out of hate for corporate services (same, though) and not for the love of selfhosting.

    He complains that the software he uses can’t handle multi-users, but that sounds like a skill issue to me. His solution is to make his government give him metered cloud services. What he actually wants is software that allows multi-users. What he wants, by extension, is federated services.

    The bulk of users on the fediverse are on large, centrally/cloud hosted instances, but the vast majority of instances are self-hosted, and can talk to the centrally hosted instances, serving usually more than the 1 user who’s hosting the instance in their attic.

    The author conflates self-hosting with self-reliance, and I understand why, but it’s wrong. If you’re part of this community, you’re probably not some off-gridder who wants nothing to do with society, self-isolating your way out of the problems we face. If you’re reading this, you already know that we don’t have to live on our own individual and isolated paradise islands to escape Big Tech. Federation is the future, but selfhosting is fundamental to that, and not everything can or should be federated. Selfhosting is also the future.

  • philpo@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Lol. So we trust local governments and communities now?

    Has anyone ever worked with them IT wise?

    I do so in four different EU countries and know people who do in the US and Canada. And…well…there is a reason local governments often went towards the cloud services. Do people think Joe Admin in Bumfucknowhere can operate what basically becomes a MiniDC? And who controls that?

    Sorry. Either go “host at home” and only fuck up things for oneself. Or do it properly with a proper DC. Colocate if you want. But that? I know it sounds appealing, especially for someone entering selfhosting (like the author did a few weeks ago). But there is a reason hosting is a business once it comes to other peoples data.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Lol. So we trust local governments and communities now?

      I trust my local community more than i trust Amazon, that’s for sure.

      Communities might be incompetent with IT (today), but maybe they just need a while to catch up. It could work in 10 years from now, and we gotta work towards that point.

      Also, note that “local community” doesn’t have to mean municipality; it can also be your local nerd working part-time at your local library.

      • philpo@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        And this is somehow better?

        There is a lot of room between “BigTech” and “Joe Average” doing it for his neighbours. Mailbox.org, etc. (see my other post here)

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      I can easily host vaultwarden, trillium, docker-mailserver, jellyfin, borgbackup and syncthing instances for my 5 neighbours. Everyone who’s even slightly good with computers can do that for their neighbours. That’s what I think when I hear “community”. Not online fandoms.

      • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        I think the issue is more that large tech firms can absolutely deal with external security in their applications. The amount of times gmail or Microsoft 365 has been hacked and leaked a bunch of client data is statistically zero when looking at their attack area.

        Joe Dirt self hosting a mail server for his neighbors on a salvaged rack server is 1000x more likely to get hacked or lose a ton of his neighbors’ data than a big tech firm.

        That is kind of the trade off for community hosting. There are very very few backup and security-literate people in communities.

  • SolarPunker@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Every city should host main public web servicies for its citizens, each one as an instance of a complex system, that’s how anarchy works.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      That quickly becomes a tragedy of the commons. The city residents pay for it but how do you verify “citizenship”?

      • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        If you mean citizenship as being associated to the city whose hosting services you are using, yhe power or water bill pointed at your name and residence should be able to do that. Now, if you want that plus anonimity, the only practical option I can think of for a city-wide physical campaign is some sort of GPG Signature Meetup (“signature party”).

        • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          yhe power or water bill pointed at your name and residence

          Many people live in cities without owning their house. So they never see those bills. Renters are usually two levels away from the actual owner. Then there are all the people who live and work in cities but aren’t official renters.