Anyways it feels silly to require always-on service when history could just be part of the protocol.
I just think that the general argument that users are only capable of running server software with as much uptime as they care for (in the “easy” < 90% range) is unfair to users. They’re not dumb, it’s us the programmers who have made them behave as though they are and gave them little choice in it.
All that aside, a say 95- to 99-percent-online machine is pretty handy to have when you can code, you should try it if you don’t have one. The best such machine is one you don’t use interactively—an old desktop in a closet, an RPi with a USB HDD, hell, that old Eee PC you have laying around gathering dust works pretty well and even comes with builtin battery backup. You don’t—and shouldn’t—need to have one, but it’s liberating to be able to go “oh I’ll just throw that into urlwatch and have it poke me on Telegram” without a second thought.
(Now if it’s an extra-special piece of software just to use your extra-special chat, then they’ll tell you to take a hike, true. They’ve got to actually want to get to the dancing bunnies[1] first.)
[1] https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-dancing-bunnies-problem/