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 🤔
i think that would be called remote hosting or cloud hosting? self-hosting is where you host the services your self, without third party hardware or systems.
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.
Yeah, I agree with ‘nuke first ask questions later’ when your compromised host is impacting other devices. If and only if i knew the attempts weren’t going anywhere or doing anything would I consider unicing the vm/container to see what happened.
Now that I reflect on the embarrassment, it was a cheap, shared VPS and I’m pretty sure I was dogging the share. LOL Ahhhh…innocence. However, it was evident I needed some personal edification. Now, I am told, I over engineer security, but it works, so keep it the way it is.
“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).
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.
To me, it is not. If the internet or anything else goes down you lose all access. You are not hosting your services, so claiming to be SELF-hosting is not really accurate.
Furthermore, in the phylosophical aspect, you depend on a private company for all your infrastructure and are not doing anything against the centralization of the internet. To me, this is one of the core reasons I self-host. Maybe we need to make new terms for this, but allowing anything under the corporate cloud umbrella to be called SELF-hosting seems bad to me.
If the internet or anything else goes down you lose all access.
That’s also the case when your home connection or electricity goes down and you’re not on site.
If that’s not a concern, then you don’t need to self-host, you just need a desktop app.
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.
Love to see the people in here gatekeeping “selfhosting” 🙄
We’re all just out here trying to escape big tech. A docker container doesn’t suddenly stop becoming “selfhosted” once the hard drive it’s on crosses a property line. Who the hell cares, seriously.
It’s not gate keeping it isn’t self hosting someone else is hosting it hence the self is removed. Should discussions be allowed sure as long as it’s about the application and not problems with their hosting provider.
I can see you care about this a lot, so please tell me; in your opinion at what point does a PC cease to be “self hosted”? When it’s carried across the property line? Maybe if the electricity bill is paid by a roommate?
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.
I can see it both ways.
IDK what’s happened to you or why your post got removed.
Obviously “self-hosting” as a term is broad and subjective.
IMO this community discusses hosting services in an environment where you’re responsible for installing, configuring, and maintaining your own stuff.
A purist might argue that self-hosting doesn’t include services residing on a VPS, but what’s the point of excluding those discussions from this community? In practical terms the nature of the activity is the same.
I mean by definition it isn’t self hosting as someone else is hosting the service for you.
You’re welcome to your own definition.
Whether you’re configuring a docker container running on a server in your basement or on a VPS the issues you encounter are going to be much the same. The definition of self-hosted isn’t really relevant.
If you want to exclude people running services on rented hardware that just seems dumb.
It seems fair to me
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
Fewer Letters More Letters CGNAT Carrier-Grade NAT DNS Domain Name Service/System HA Home Assistant automation software ~ High Availability NAT Network Address Translation VPN Virtual Private Network VPS Virtual Private Server (opposed to shared hosting)
[Thread #43 for this comm, first seen 29th Jan 2026, 21:40] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
Why do I see this comment when I have lemmy’s “hide bots” flag set?
No
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’s not really a question of working or not, is it? it’s a question of what words mean. if somebody says why isn’t an orange considered an apple, it’s perfectly normal to say it’s because they’re two different things. you wouldn’t say, “do what works for you, make an apple pie with oranges”, would you?
So why don’t we just rename the group to “Puritan Self-Hosting Only”? Where is your line?
I know you’re feeling very self-righteous right now, but I hope at some point you can calm down enough to step back and realize this is such a silly thing to be getting so dramatic over.
I’d say it isn’t self hosted. Same as companies doing the same not calling it on prem. No should discussions be allowed here yes as long as it isn’t about the hosting provider.
LOVELY COMMENT.
What are you getting at?
