5 ms·
I view the final two conclusions points, that people do not want to run their own servers and that we need to make software easier to build/run, to be one and t
by mediocregopher 5y ago
I view the final two conclusions points, that people do not want to run their own servers and that we need to make software easier to build/run, to be one and the same. Is the reason people don't want to run a server because it's just so difficult and expensive to keep a computer online in your living room (remembering that a smaller deployment doesn't need 20 nines of uptime), or is it because the UX of running server software has always been terrible? Could an OS be made which makes running a server actually a friendly process? We managed to design OSs which made running apps on a _mobile device_ a friendly process, surely the same could be done here.
- password1 5y agoThis is a great point, makes me wonder if there is a market for such a service.
- AlotOfReading 5y agoThe internet as it exists today for the vast majority of people simply isn't well-equipped for everyone to have their own servers. Imagine a small server box that you could simply plug into the wall and give your wifi credentials. You still have the solve the NAT issue. You still have to secure the publicly routable box somehow and constantly apply updates, or backdate when (not if) something breaks. In parts of the bay, PG&E goes offline every time the wind blows. Does everything in your digital life go offline with it? There's a lot that goes into running a reasonably reliable server.
- astrange 5y agoThey're also noisy and you don't have a personal security team.
- bsagdiyev 5y agoFalse to both. My home server is quiet and my OS keeps updated automatically.
- astrange 5y agoI put my NAS in a quiet PC case (it’s still too loud because I don’t have any closets to keep it in) and when I filed a FreeNAS bug a graybeard literally yelled at me for not using a 1U server.