4 ms·
This smells like the classic "you can build your own Dropbox easily" comment. Just because it's technologically feasible doesn't mean people want to do so.
by elliotbnvl 5y ago
This smells like the classic "you can build your own Dropbox easily" comment. Just because it's technologically feasible doesn't mean people want to do so.
- titzer 5y agoNote, I didn't claim that. I'd love to put a box in my house next to the cable modem that did all that stuff in a manageable, understandable way, that wasn't some underhanded subscription service that is going to try to squeeze me in the future or whoops my data amongst its constant, silent upgrading itself. But alas, no such box exists, and the software components that would go in that box seem to need constant babysitting and arcane configuration. Worse, it seems like all those overcomplicated things keep having critically bad security vulnerabilities and I'm just wondering what the actual fuck is wrong with having a damn thing on my computer that receives my email and serves a webpage.
- Pxtl 5y agoYes. Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's easy. I'd love to see appliance-level servers become standard, but you'd need Google or Apple to throw their weight behind such a thing to make it usable, since decades of server software/hardware development has failed to produce things that require less-than-professional-level users. I'd love to buy an off-the-shelf box for my network, have it act as a back-end for all my Google cloud-based apps and email and serve my blog and my photos and automatically encrypt and back it all up to a cloud storage system. But none of the big players are interested in that kind of thing, and the small players can't create replacements for the entire Google or Apple or Microsoft server/client architecture.