mastodon.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
The original server operated by the Mastodon gGmbH non-profit

Administered by:

Server stats:

366K
active users

My self-hosted git repo inside my own network is still working. How about yours?

@vkc Since no one else on this thread is representing this viewpoint: I want to remind people that unless you're putting unreasonable amounts of time, money, and energy into redundancy, self-hosted services have lower uptime than centralized ones. (At least, responsibly-run ones like GitHub.)

Sure, you maintain control. (Which IS valuable!)

But there's a cost in time and headaches.

@nephariuz "self-hosted services have lower uptime than centralized ones"

1. Citation needed, and
2. Uptime is only as important as the access need. I shut down servers when I don't need the services, another joy of self-hosting.

@vkc I'm betting in the past you've had issues (e.g. hardware failure) that you had to troubleshoot before you could access your own service. I certainly have.

For centralized services, such issues are *their* problem to solve. If you're self-hosting, it's *your* problem to solve.

@nephariuz yeah, but that's not what you said. What you said is that you "wanted to remind people" that the time spent on self-hosting your services well was "unreasonable". And what I'm saying is that your assertion lacks citation, plus ignores the fact that uptime isn't all that important to a lot of us.

nephariuz

@vkc Broad data is not available because people who self-host are not required to report uptime. And "unreasonable" is subjective, of course.

@nephariuz right, but you didn't say "subjectively there's an argument to be made".

You got on my post and felt like you "wanted to remind people", which *absolutely* comes across as arguing down to me, a literal professional, about the benefits of hosting your wares.

And if that's not how you intended it, please rethink your word choices and hop off this thread.