←back to thread

What I Self Host

(fredrikmeyer.net)
116 points FredrikMeyer | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.439s | source
Show context
teddyh ◴[] No.45645903[source]
I deplore this weakening and dilution of the term “self-hosting”. In my opinion, if your services had downtime today, you are not “self-hosting”. If you depend on anything which has “cloud” in its name, you are not “self-hosting”. If you cannot reasonably quickly access your hardware physically, like inserting or replacing an add-on card, you are not “self-hosting”.

EDIT: It’s like saying “I don’t take the bus! I ‘self-drive’ my own car! (By which I mean that I employ an agency to provide a driver to drive a car for me, which I rent!)” or “I self-grow and self-harvest all my own food! By which I mean that I pay a farmer to grow food and harvest it for me.”

Words have meaning.

(Further: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21240357>)

replies(22): >>45645971 #>>45645977 #>>45645989 #>>45646006 #>>45646031 #>>45646206 #>>45646220 #>>45646259 #>>45646379 #>>45646413 #>>45646486 #>>45646708 #>>45646715 #>>45646804 #>>45646832 #>>45647244 #>>45647506 #>>45647959 #>>45649823 #>>45651076 #>>45652798 #>>45654558 #
dooglius ◴[] No.45646259[source]
How do you define it? If your ISP has a problem, you can't access that hardware physically, so it would seem this definition rules out anyone that doesn't control an ISP.
replies(1): >>45646310 #
teddyh ◴[] No.45646310[source]
This is a common, but disingenuous, objection. People also don’t make their own electricity. Is therefore “self-host” an unreachable goal, which nobody can fulfill in practice? No, this would be a useless definition.
replies(2): >>45647170 #>>45654770 #
1. dooglius ◴[] No.45647170[source]
I agree that that's a bad definition, that's my point. The question is how _you_ are defining it since your definition seems to have this problem; if you're going to complain about others' use of the term you should indicate what you think the term should mean!