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 🤔
Your post was removed because it wasn’t about any self-hosted applications, services, or infrastructure. Instead, you were complaining about the customer support of a VPS provider.
A case could be made that Rule 7 should have been cited, instead of Rule 3.
Alright, I guess I should have rather made a post like PSA: beware of Netcup, they shut you down on suspicion of doing stuff against their ToS whether it’s actually the case or not and without giving you a warning to respond.
meh…I wouldn’t get too crunk about it. If you’re here for any length of time, you’re bound to have a few mod deleted posts.
If OP was self-hosting they wouldn’t have had a problem with their hosting provider.
i donno i think you’re self hosting if you’re the admin
Your hosting but not self hosting.
No, Hosting has a technical definition. When you rent a server or in this case VPS, the company is hosting you. You can maintain or administer the services but you are never hosting yourself on someone else’s computer.
Woah TIL that because I’m admin, I’m self hosting an entire enterprise of nearly 50,000 users.
In my opinion, it’s (the service) self-hosted and not home-hosted. Hardware is just a platform.
This is a great way to say it. I feel the same. You put the same effort in regardless where it comes from.
Thank you. I was thinking the same thing. Some things it makes sense to host in your home. Things like large media, home automation, etc. Some things it doesn’t. Like DNS, service that require large amounts of egress (most home internet is very asymmetric), anything with a more public face.
Generally it boils down to privacy and reliability. If it’s private, keep it home. If it needs more reliability, put it on a VPS.
My home hardware is just not reliable enough to host something critical. I have redundant systems but it might take a bit to get stuff back.
This idea of it not being self hosted because it’s on somebody else’s computer is just weird.
I put my uptime kuma on the VPS to monitor my home infrastructure from the outside. Let’s me know when things go down much more reliably.
This idea of it not being self hosted because it’s on somebody else’s computer is just weird.
I am running the software. I set it up. I maintain it. I can change it to whatever I want. It is therefore self-hosted.
I agree, but Is it your hardware? Does an outside company own your hardware? Did you set up your own hardware that you control as your own (self) place of hosting? Do you maintain all of that hardware or does an outside company maintain that? Can a company arbitrarily shut down your host like what happened in OPs case?
Self-hosting is my choice to use my own hardware to (self) host. I am wanting to slowly move other stuff from hosting providers and self-host it on my own hardware.
I agree with all your statements except for the last sentence, because I use those same arguments to judge whether or not to host at home (self) or host externally.
I mean I get what you’re saying. And certain things I really do want in my house. But at this point I feel like we disagree on a definition which is just kind of silly. As someone else said that used the distinction of home-hosted and self-hosted. I like being in control of my stuff and I think we both agree on that.
Hey, I’m glad you said that! You’re right, we are just arguing semantics. We both agree that this hobby/job is something important
Well, if you want to stir the pot, there are heavy discussions on both sides of the fence. Personally, I don’t get all pedantic about it. To quote Ice Cube; ‘Do your thing man, fuck what they looking at’.
As far as your post being deleted, it seems to be arbitrary at times and rather silent when courteous inquiries are made.
Well, I noticed my post got moderated when I wasn’t able to reply to you, so here’s my reply :
The very first Linux server I ever stood up got whacked. I got a nastygram from my host that he had shut it down because of malicious activity against other servers. So, from their standpoint, I can understand why.
Yes, but they should warn before shutting down, give you at least a few hours to speak for yourself.
Yes, but they should warn before shutting down,
IDK, if I were running the show, I’d probably have done the same thing especially when it started to involve other servers. I would assume that there would be some legal ramifications should it have just been ignored. It would have been good to observe to see if I could come up with who the puppeteer was, but I was super green then and probably wouldn’t have known where to start as far as forensics. I mean, if you get hacked, the knee jerk reaction is to pull the plug, but it would be more productive to do some forensics before killing the server.
At the very least, you could cut off Internet access and reduce vCores to 0.5, instead of completely shutting it down and only offering the user to book 4 hours of access during business hours as if they didn’t have work too.
When you say moderated, do you mean a comment or did you do another post? if its a comment is that something your instance does? or did it just fail to send. you peaked my curiosity because I wasn’t aware of instances filtering comments, only posts.
No I mean the post was removed.
Honestly, do we need a legal definition of what “self hosting” is and what isn’t?
I didn’t see your post and in the modlog I can only see it’s title: “Apparently I’m into Web3, says Netcup” [ed: Netcup is a hosting company].
If your post was discussing stuff specific to your hosting provider, then the mods did well in removing it - if you were talking about things that would have interested this community, then they have probably been too rash in removing the post.
I would be inclined to think that if you are just renting a machine or VM and all the configuration/maintenance is your problem it would be close enough. But I am not a mod and don’t want to be.
“The cloud” is somebody else’s computer. Somebody else leases you the space and compute, somebody else can turn the physical machine off or terminate your access to their service. Self-hosting is about removing as many somebody-elses as possible (you’re still on the hook for stuff like power and an ISP, though a lot of self-hosted stuff is also designed to function purely offline so it’s just power for that stuff).
You don’t have a mini generator in your home lab XD.
Technically no, because it’s cloud-hosted infrastructure. Businesses usually call this IaaS, Infrastructure as a Service.
But it’s still a good way to build your own services that you can possibly trust more than public cloud services. IMO posts about setting up your own trusted services could be valuable content for the community even if you set it up on the cloud.
To me personally self hosted means the only way the service / files can be taken from me, is to physically enter my house and take the HD
Anything shy of that I don’t fully consider self hosting.
Not because I’m gate keeping, it’s just that I don’t trust any corporation, and the minute they are involved, enschitification is inevitable
Yet they’re already in your home.
Is it self hosting? No.
Does it matter? Idk.
By definition, the cloud provider is hosting you. It’s not about being good or bad it just is. If the mod deemed your question to be irrelevant to the community then idk maybe it does matter in this context.
I’m not a mod but, to me I see self hosting as maintaining your own setup. If it’s hosted in a cloud you still are maintaining the setup you are just offloading hardware responsibilities to someone else.
It’s not like you are signing up for google photos and then saying “yo guys I have my own photos self hosted”, you still are putting the pain and suffering into making it work, you just aren’t worrying about the hardware or network requirements (outside of security)
Being said, some people firmly see "“self-hosting” as you buy the parts, install and configure everything and it’s coming out of your house.
It’s a sticky situation, imo that type of ideology also throws any type of using a DNS/DDOS host out the window as well., but again YMMV depending on who you ask.
I definitly think if you are installing -> configuring -> maintaining and then -> using. you meet the definition of self hosting.
edit: Being said, looking at the log, your deleted post was the one about your current external host provider dropping you due to heavy load(they were eco friendly) right? I can kind of see why they felt this didn’t meet the environment of the community. But i see both sides of the argument.
your deleted post was the one about your current external host provider dropping you due to heavy load(they were eco friendly) right?
I did not do any of the sh*it they accuse me of. I want to be eco-friendly too. That’s one of the primary reasons why I self-host and write code.
Host can take your data and shut you down. Not SELF hosted. Same as business not calling it on PREM hosting when they do the same.
Stop giving the purists cred here.
If it works for you, use it. Christ.
Of course. I’m only asking because of my post being removed for apparently not following the rules.
It is selfhosting when YOU set it up and CONTROL it.
Doesn’t matter what machine it runs on. Not everyone has the option of running a machine at home.
If you can’t run a machine at home then you can’t self-host. You’re welcome to cloud-host though.
I think it considered self-hosting as in self-hosting services/software but not the hardware.
I’m currently using a VPS for multiple reasons. Hardware is kinda expensive where I’m currently living. And due to CGNAT I would need to setup a tailscale node or VPN etc somewhere else anyway. Also home internet isn’t reliable at all here and I may need to access my stuff when outside and regardless if my internet is acting up or there’s a blackout.
Although in the future I’m planning on migrating to a dual setup where my core server lives at home and the public front (along with some smaller services and apps) is on a VPS.
No
