this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
296 points (93.5% liked)

Selfhosted

40313 readers
287 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Centralization is bad for everyone everywhere.

That bring said... I just moved my homeserver to another city... and I plugged in the power, then I plugged in the ethernet, and that was the whole shebang.

Tunnels made it very easy. No port forwarding no dns configuration no firewall fiddling no nothing.

Why do they have to make it so so easy...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 134 points 4 months ago (25 children)

The trouble with cloudflare is that there is just one. It’s one of the best registrars out there, the only free/cheap and usable DNS host (have you seen what route53 charges per zone??). That without getting into the whole tunnels and DDoS mitigation end of things, which is nearly unique at any price point.

The problem with cloudflare is that we’re missing three other cloudflares to move to if they decide to pull evil shit.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 56 points 4 months ago (8 children)

The bigger trouble is creating a CDN has a stupidly high barrier to entry. You literally need your own data centers across the world, your own server infrastructure, the man power to manage it, etc.

You could try to host it on a cloud provider but you’d go bankrupt even quicker. Unless someone were to try to build a co-op run CDN, it’s just not gonna happen without a profit motive and a large amount of capital.

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

I mean the optimal cdn is maximally distributed to reduce load and latency right. Unfortunatly the web was not built in a manner that supports this.

Eg if we could have a single url for the same object that could be served by any server that is part of the fediverse then the fediverse itself would be an optimal cdn.

Perhaps we should take some notes from peertube. Plus more legitimate bit torrent content on the internet as a whole is hardly a bad thing make the isp's jobs harder for places without net neutrality.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

I consulted with professor gpt and it seams that it's basicly just giving the same ip address to multiple servers meaning that any of said servers can serve as that ip.

Also it seems said ips require paying large sums of money to isps. My poiny was more that with the current mainstream internet (http websockets etc) it would require you to run a local service/proxy that can interpret a global id and route to basicly any small server with said resource. Unfortunatly i dont think its possible to build such a thing that would just work across browsers if embedded into a standard webpage.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)