3 ms·
Self hosting is not necessary for security. If it were, B2B and B2G services wouldn’t exist. It could be necessary for “freedom” depending on your definition,
by kube-system 4mo ago
Self hosting is not necessary for security. If it were, B2B and B2G services wouldn’t exist.
It could be necessary for “freedom” depending on your definition, which is a political argument and not a technical one.
I don’t know if you’ve ever tried to explain RMS’s opinions to anyone outside of tech before, but the primary disconnect is not an issue of education or literacy, but priority.
The primary reason people are not dissuaded by a services model is because they want a service.
Imagine you are reading a lawnmower enthusiast forum and everyone unanimously agrees that lawn services are immoral because they don’t let the homeowner own the mower or make adjustments to it. This is what this argument sounds like to many people. Many people just want their lawn cut, they don’t give a shit about the tool that accomplishes it.
- mmooss 4mo ago> Self hosting is not necessary for security. That moves the goalposts from 'tech sovereignty' to self-hosting. The rest describes the tech community's failure to communicate its importance. Sanitation is also inconvenient, as is quitting smoking, wearing seatbelts, and forgoing lead where it might be eaten or breathed, but people are persuaded. We've failed so far, and it's even more embarassing to blame the circumstances.
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]