this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
487 points (98.6% liked)

Selfhosted

52403 readers
1135 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It is still a logical argument, especially for smaller shops. I mean, you can (as self-hosters know) set up automatic backups, failover systems, and all that, but it takes significant time & resources. Redundant internet connectivity? Redundant power delivery? Spare capacity to handle a 10x demand spike? Those are big expenses for small, even mid-sized business. No one really cares if your dentist's office is offline for a day, even if they have to cancel appointments because they can't process payments or records.

Meanwhile, theoretically, reliability is such a core function of cloud providers that they should pay for experts' experts and platinum standard infrastructure. It makes any problem they do have newsworthy.

I mean,it seems silly for orgs as big and internet-centric as Fortnite, Zoom, or forturne-500 bank to outsource their internet, and maybe this will be a lesson for them.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's also silly for the orgs to not have geographic redundancy.

[–] killabeezio@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No it's not. It's very expensive to run and there are a lot of edge cases. It's much easier to have regional redundancy for a fraction of the cost.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 4 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

The organizations they were talking about and I was referring to have a global presence

Plus, it's not significantly more expensive to have a cold standby in a different geographic location in AWS.