this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
56 points (79.8% liked)

Selfhosted

55319 readers
426 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.

  7. No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm asking cause my previous post regarding my server that isn't at home got moderated for violating rule 3. I don't get it πŸ€”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

This feels like a bad faith argument. If the internet goes down, I will be able to access my servers and my data by simply going home. If those services were hosted in the cloud, I wouldn't not be able to access my data at all. Obviously one is better than the other.

[–] KaKi87@jlai.lu 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Except one benefit of the datacenter is redundancy : it going offline is way less likely than your home Internet (or anything else it depends on) going down.

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 1 points 26 minutes ago (1 children)

Sure, but if stuff goes really south, I can still access the stuff on my hardware from my home. If stuff goes down, I cannot access the stuff in data centers, period.

[–] KaKi87@jlai.lu 1 points 7 minutes ago

Do you really access your data most often from home than remotely ?

[–] ready_for_qa@programming.dev 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The logic seemed sound to me. If you have to go home to access then you are no longer hosting it if hosting means to serve to the outside. If you are dependent on an ISP or power company to host then an argument can be made that either youre not self hosting or that self hosting allows the inclusion of a third party. If you are giving a pass to include a third party, then having a cloud provider could be seen as a third party to self hosting.

If making the service accessible from the outside is not a consideration for self hosting, then is running a desktop application considered to be self hosting if youre sitting at the computer it's running on?

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 1 points 23 minutes ago

I'm not sure what the disconnect is here. In both scenarios I'm reliant on an ISP. In the scenario where it's on a data center, if my internet goes down or the data center goes down, I am shit out of luck. I am not capable of accessing my data. If it's hosted at my house, I still have the ability to go home and access my stuff. One seems much better than the other to me. It's the difference between being able to access your stuff and not.