The problem with general public (people at home) is that most of them really don't want to pay for such software anymore and for the developer it requires to worry too much about stuff always getting broken as it runs in a galore of different configs.

For my stuff 90% of support issues are just bad permissions, bad mounted filesystem, somebody forgot to run apt update, etc. People really think that all those issues are our responsibility, just to educate the customer is a waste of everybody's time.

That's exactly what it is. Some software charges a subscription for self hosting. You maintain everything like a sysadmin and pay a huge per user per month subscription fee. It's insane.

Look at authentication systems to see how ridiculous the price discrimination / gouging has become. It costs $0.0055 per month for and AWS Cognito user or $0.00325 per month for an Azure AD External Identities user. However, as soon as you use Active Directory for employees it's several dollars per month per user. The P1 plans are $6 per user per month. What makes auth for an employee worth 184,000% more than it is for a customer?

I think big tech is absolutely scamming everyone, especially small businesses. They're taking "charge what the market will bear" to a whole new level and the only reason it's working is because anti-trust laws aren't being enforced. If we had fair competition the cost for a lot of tech would drop substantially IMO. There's a lot of room in a market with 2000x markup.

upload is aggressively throttled, filtered, sniffed, redirected, and otherwise treated as a hostile act by ISPs, to submit to the demands of the media industry and keep squeezing businesses for exorbitant rates for the same bloody service but with the filters turned off.

your average consumer ISP account where i live can't even run sshd without using complicated work arounds.

the system has de-democratized web hosting and monolithic services have rushed to fill the vacuum left by the death of the ISP hosting era.

A friend who basically was freelance and did tons of self-hosted IT shit for years, has given up and is now doing contract work in fucking Photoshop, because you can't practically run own hardware services anymore.

It's a joke, and it upsets me that it all seems to just have happened quietly under everyone's nose, and no one seems to be worried about it at all.

I only wish people knew what "e.g." meant -- "exampli gratia" or "free example". Folks on HN frequently use e.g. when they mean i.e. or "id est" or "that is". When you know the Latin, it rankles you every time.

However despite Latin, "data" is stuff just like "hair" in standard English. "The hair _is_ on the floor", not "The hair _are_ on the floor." And thus "the data is collected", not "the data _are_ collected". English isn't a slave to Latin, but some misuses are too egregious to be tolerated.

Just like you, I substitute "e.g." whenever I want to use "for example", and "i.e." for "that is".

I find the difference quite straightforward once I "get it".

I've only ever seen it abbreviated. The only time I've seen it spelled out is when I looked up what it meant.

This means that the administrator must be sufficiently skilled to be able to handle all anything that might come at him. Which means that he's expensive. This makes it economically hard to compete against hosting, where they administrators can be cheaper due to having more controlled environments.

One solution is for administrators to insist on that environment conforms to some sort of standard. But no meaningful standardization currently exist for this context.

Making the device/software resilient enough, is also very hard, and suffers the same problems as with human administrators. If you install a device in a network with a faulty router, then what is that device supposed to do? How does it even know the router is the culprit?

I don't see why it can't be both. I run an eCommerce website and pay $5/month to DigitalOcean for what is basically a VPS running Wordpress and Cyberpanel (free and good cPanel alternative).

The reason I'm happy to pay that $5 is because it makes a whole host of technical problems disappear. I don't have to worry about maintaining hardware or dealing with an outage if my (consumer) internet is down for maintenance. I don't have to configure my router or set up the CDN, and the bandwidth they have at these data centres is 10x what I have at home.

If these technical problems disappeared, I wouldn't need to outsource the hosting to an external provider and could save myself the hosting fee. On the other hand, if cloud hosting were significantly more expensive (or if I was just running a website as a hobby and didn't care about downtime), I'd definitely spend the time learning to self-host.