2 ms·

Probably no worse than the alternatives. Just about everything is going to be easy to upgrade except possibly the Kubernetes masters (and even that isn’t so bad

• akkartik 5y ago
  For sure no worse than the alternatives. I also don't care about downtime. But I'm looking for something that minimizes the overheads over not self-hosting. I'd love to prove Moxie Marlinspike wrong that "people don't want to run their own servers, and never will." (https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html) This is the key bottleneck in getting people to run their own servers.
  • throwaway894345 5y ago
    For sure. There’s not much of an economical argument for self-hosting—if you’re doing it, it’s almost implied that you’re doing it for fun. Although having run a small (but really scaleable c/o k8s) homelab for <$2/month, I’m not sure I’d save much effort versus using some PaaS or cloud provider now that I know what I’m doing. Like I’d need a real load balancer and a few other things so we’re talking < ~$100/month to productionize.
    • akkartik 5y ago
      I still believe :) I'm looking not for an economic argument but for a strategic one. I think[1] a self-hosted setup with minimal dependencies can be more resilient than a conventional one, whether with a vendor or self-hosted. https://sandstorm.io https://sandstorm.io got a lot right. I wish they'd paid more attention to upgrade burdens. [1] https://github.com/akkartik/mu https://github.com/akkartik/mu
      • throwaway894345 5y ago
        Fine, take my upvotes. :) In all seriousness, that’s an interesting perspective that I hadn’t considered.