this post was submitted on 26 May 2026
93 points (76.3% liked)

Selfhosted

60543 readers
1060 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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been thinking about this more and more. According to the sidebar, this community is "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." Based on that I don't think Plex qualifies.

Privacy: Plex clearly records the metadata of what you watch. When I used it, it would send me a report by email of what my "friends" were watching. Even with that turned off, their services still track telemetry.

Control: Plex has all of it. They can (and do) make unilateral changes to the service, how authentication works, where you can run it, etc.

So I ask, when you are hosting something that is entirely dependent on a commercial entity to function, is Plex really selfhosting in the spirit of this community?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] irmadlad@lemmy.world 84 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

Is really Self Hosting?

I don't really get hung up on the nomenclature and definitions. If you run your services off of a VPS and call it selfhosting, more power to you. No skin off my nose. If you run your services off of a homelab rack that dims the lights whenever you power it on and you call it selfhosting, more power to you. If you're running your services off of an old repurposed, disposable vape unit, and you call it selfhosting, git sum. It's a big umbrella and we can all coexist without nitpicking each other. Gatekeeping is something I don't do, and it gets tiresome to hear others regurgitate the same trope over and over again.

ETA: @CallMeAl@piefed.zip, nice profile shot.

[–] zener_diode@feddit.org 19 points 1 month ago (4 children)

If you run your services off of a homelab rack that dims the lights whenever you power it on

If you are in this situation, then you definetly should get some more power, or at least a UPS to make sure you don't trip a breaker.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ooohhhhh, now I get it.

My first thought was dimming the lights like when a movie starts and that seemed silly.

[–] irmadlad@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Hey if you like a more intimate setting when you're with your server, far be it from me to interfere. Throw on a little Barry White and some Ottis Redding and git sum.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Kushan@lemmy.world 66 points 1 month ago

It's self hosting by the literal definition that you host the server yourself.

That it's closed source and sends all kinds of data to another server is an entirely separate (and valid) concern.

As much as I agree with the concerns around Plex, I would rather we didn't start gatekeeping the self hosting community with arbitrary requirements and grey lines around what is and isn't "true self hosting" or whatever. I would far rather we inform people and let them make their own choices about what they want to host on their private devices and networks.

[–] HeartyOfGlass@piefed.social 33 points 1 month ago (1 children)

... well, at some point any hobby grows to the point where purists show up.

There's give and take with everything. Is it "self" hosted if you rely on Docker - a 3rd party with control over their own infrastructure? Or hosting it on a Debian OS? Is it really "private" if it's connected to the internet at all?

Are you running the Plex Server application on some hardware so other devices can access the library? Hey, that's self-hosting. That's it.

[–] czl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 36 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I guess I’m not selfhosting at all, I use a power grid that I don’t control.

[–] gedfromgont@piefed.ca 16 points 1 month ago

Have you mined the minerals though?

Or to put it in another way "to truly selfhost you need to start by creating the universe".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CameronDev@programming.dev 33 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I don't think there are any hard and fast rules for what is self hosting. Lots of people use cloudflare, which would fail both of your criteria as well.

At least with Plex/cloudflare/others, your overall control and privacy is better and more in your control than it would be with other non-self hosted alternatives.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] remon@ani.social 23 points 1 month ago (13 children)

As long as you're running it on your own hardware, it sure is.

Privacy: Plex clearly records the metadata of what you watch.

Sure, that doesn't really have anything to do with self-hosting, though.

Control: Plex has all of it.

They have no control at all over the contents of your media library. Even if they shut down everything, all your media is still there. They merely have control over a user interface that can be replaced.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] jay@mbin.zerojay.com 18 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It's why I also consider cloudflare against the spirit of the community but I'm not going to give anyone hell over doing things how they want to with their own stuff. Freedom to do things as we'd like is part of the reason why we're all here, right?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Coleslaw4145@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If you are hosting software services (proprietary or not) on hardware you control, in a network you control, then you are self-hosting. What the service itself actually is is irrelevant.

[–] german@pawb.social 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

Please don’t try to gatekeep software or turn selfhosting into a Professional Redditor Larper shitwar like iOS vs Android. Literally no one needs or wants that.

You can criticise Plex for its many shortcomings, that’s valid. Even better if you contribute to Jellyfin so it can overcome its shortcomings. But saying Plex is not self-hosted for puritan reasons is not a good look and smells like StackOverflow and elitist neckbeards; you’re disqualifying people from the community just because you, in your infinite pedantic wisdom, cannot comprehend that they also have valid reasons for using what they use.

By this logic:

  • If you use the internet, nothing you access through it is self-hosted, because your ISP dictates if it’s allowed or not. Tailscale, WireGuard, OpenVPN, or a direct port connection are all subject to this. However you can access Jellyfin remotely is subject to this.
  • Docker isn’t self-hosted - you depend on Docker Inc, their image registry will be aware of some details about your host, including your IP, which is technically PII and is directly linked to you.
  • Let’s Encrypt certificates aren’t self-hosted because they’re an external CA and collect data like your email.
  • Jellyfin is not self-hosted, it depends on TMDB and OMDB which are commercial or external.
  • Pi-hole is not self-hosted as it depends in many cases on GitHub or external resources for its block lists, and it depends on public resolvers to operate.
  • Ubuntu is not self-hosted because Canonical controls everything and has telemetry
  • Neither is Windows, Mac, Debian, Arch, or even FreeBSD - they control updates and packages and if they randomly become evil, they have levers on you no matter what. Maybe TempleOS lol.
  • Nextcloud is not self-hosted because they control the add-on store, update servers and has telemetry.
  • The BitTorrent protocol isn’t self hosted because you rely on trackers and they collect telemetry about your client
  • Media piracy isn’t self-hosted because you’re relying on other people to produce it for you
  • If you get phone notifications, emails, messages, or whatever else - those aren’t self hosted. Even if you host Ntfy you’re still relying on Apple or Google notification relay servers.

I could go on.

By any stretch of this line of thinking, even the mere act of downloading any software in the first place disqualifies it from counting as self-hosted, because you didn’t build it from scratch and you depend on an external resource, your ISP, a DNS resolver, your operating system, your hardware (microcode, BIOS), your browser, and so on and so forth. The logic breaks down very fast. Don’t.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] jlow@slrpnk.net 10 points 1 month ago (13 children)

For me, if I can't use it when the internet is down it's not self-hosting, so Plex certainly isn't for me.

[–] Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Mine works when the internet is down. Why doesn't yours?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Bitswap@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What? You need internet to use plex? Can't you just type in the local IP?

You can use Plex without the Internet. But it takes an extra two or three setup steps, so lots of people immediately jump to “wahhh my Plex isn’t working” when their Internet goes out. Not because it can’t work, but because they didn’t jump through the extra hoops to ensure it does.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I'm going to shame people for using something that used to work well. This will help me by making me feel superior, and it will help others by shaming them. What a good idea I've had!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] False@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

Just as much as Tailscale is self hosting. Tailscale is probably more concerning from a security point of view.

[–] CallMeAl@piefed.zip 9 points 1 month ago

To me, Tailscale is not selfhosted at all. That's why headscale exists.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Alloi@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (3 children)

im out here wondering why anyone would hand anyone credit card information to watch already downloaded pirated content.

open source to me means open source, not open/paywall/ source.

i prefer my open source free with a lil jank. as god intended.

[–] TheSambassador@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Because I'm lazy and want to be able to watch my stuff from anywhere, and let my friends access my library easily across all their devices.

Setting up Jellyfin for remote access is not trivial. Maybe for a lot of self hosting people it's fairly simple, but it's not nearly as simple as just downloading and running the Plex server software.

I paid for a lifetime account when it was 250, and I felt like it was worth it. At 750 like it is now, I probably would actually have considered figuring out Jellyfin. As with everything, it's a money/time analysis and it's less of my time to host Plex.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] remon@ani.social 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's not just about watching content, but also about having it neatly organised with your watch history tracked in a easy to use interface. And on top of that, making it easily accessible to friends/family with minimum effort.

open source to me means open source, not open/paywall/ source.

It sure means that, but not quite sure why this is relevant. There is obviously a big overlap between self-hosters and foss enthusiast on lemmy, but for me they are unrelated.

[–] tko@tkohhh.social 5 points 1 month ago (14 children)

I won't make any claims about other users, but I am using Plex for 100% legally obtained media, mostly by means of ripping physical media that I still have on my shelf. So, not everybody is using it for pirated content.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Internet@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 month ago

But you're not locked into Plex. You have your files already on your hardware and you have the ability to reuse those files for any other service.

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 month ago

If you can't download the software and then run it on an isolated, air gapped network like on a desert island, then it isn't self hosting.

[–] lokalhorst@feddit.org 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

By that definition, no. But the Threadiverse is small enough, that I would allow it. Plex follows a similar spirit, but enshittified over the years.

I use Jellyfin btw.

[–] Shimitar@downonthestreet.eu 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think Plesk is still self-hosting. Nowhere it says that self host MUST be open source or in general, free stuff. Self hosting is host on your premises, or actually host yourself (hosting on a VPS IMHO is still selfhost).

As for Plex, i discarded it from the day 0 and went with Jellyfin directly, never looked back and i am 100% happy with my choice. I would NOT consider something like Plex (with it's enshittification, pricing and overall shady approaches in general) as viable for my setup. But, it's still self-host since you host your media and your service.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mhzawadi@lemmy.horwood.cloud 6 points 1 month ago

self hosting is all about whats right for you, as said, lots here use cloudflare. I would never use cloudflare as I like to mess up my stuff on my own, not have some company piss it up and have to wait for them to fix it.

I would see plex as the half way house of self hosting, you run a service that someone else has the control over.

[–] Australis13@fedia.io 6 points 1 month ago

I agree that it doesn't fit the definition in the sidebar, and I don't use it because of those issues. If I'm self-hosting something, it's precisely because I don't want to be sharing data with a company (whether it be my photos or an inventory of my media library) or because I want more control than an external service provides.

That said, most stuff we self-host isn't going to be completely independent, e.g. if you're running anything with HTTPS, you'll need Let's Encrypt or another way of obtaining a valid cert (unless you want to get into the habit of allowing exceptions in your browser, which is not a good idea).

In the strictest sense, Plex does qualify as self-hosting (you're running the application on hardware you manage along with your own media library) - but I'd argue that the compromises it requires are not ones every one is willing to agree to.

[–] ryan_@piefed.social 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

So I ask, when you are hosting something that is entirely dependent on a commercial entity to function, is Plex really selfhosting in the spirit of this community?

I understand where you’re coming from but, to me, self hosting is an ethos, not a checklist. If self hosting has to be void of a commercial entity then my services at home that are available externally aren’t self hosted since I have to rely on my ISP for that to work. And all of the electricity for my servers comes from a commercial company so those aren’t self hosted. And using a public domain isn’t self hosting.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mrnngglry@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago

It’s like a baby step on the self hosting journey. Not as pure as Jellyfin but still a little better than Netflix. I paid for a Plex lifetime pass years ago, when they were still producing cool updates like DVR functionality for OTA broadcasts. I still run it but now Jellyfin is running alongside it with the intent of dropping Plex soon.

[–] kaidenshi@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Plex requires a Plex Pass subscription to share outside of your local network. Plex doesn’t allow you to watch media on your local network if your internet service is down, even if you have the Pass, because the service requires a constant connection to the Plex service itself. You can’t use apps on most streaming boxes and sticks without a Pass subscription. Plex records telemetry on all of your viewing habits and shares it with any of your associates who also use the service.

I switched from Plex to Emby a decade ago because of the restriction on local network streaming without an internet connection. My internet service went down and I said to myself “well I can at least watch my locally hosted files on my tv sitting next to the server”. Nope, not allowed. I emailed Plex support about it once my internet was back and they said that wasn’t a bug, it was by design. I dropped it then and there even though I had a lifetime Pass subscription.

[–] remon@ani.social 20 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Plex doesn’t allow you to watch media on your local network if your internet service is down

It actually does, you can whitelist local IP addresses to bypass plex auth servers.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] TechSquidTV@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (14 children)

This is incorrect and parroted constantly. It almost feels intentional.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›