Back in the 90s everyone thought the future would entail all consumers running their own servers in their own homes. Lol. Kinda too bad things didn't go that way, it would have been cool. The internet would have been truly decentralized rather than the centralized shitshow it's turned into now with clouds and AWS
Jose Cook
There was a distinct lack of homeserver pics in the last thread, please include your setup in your comment so we can verify your credentials. All sbc users will have their /hsg/ card revoked. You have been warned.
who would upload that picture of themselves to the internet?? wtf
Liam Cruz
> Clouds Hmm, actually much of this stuff is more standardized and self-hostable than it was before.
You can run your S3 compatible storage and run containers and stuff like that.
> everyone thought the future would entail all consumers running their own servers in their own homes I didn't have that feeling, people couldn't handle their operating systems back then.
I just thought simpler things like torrent and some more would stay in wider use than they did.
Benjamin Wood
a fellow Any Forumstard for some giggles, gave me sum.
This actually makes me depressed. Imagine how much fun the internet would be if everyone had their own unique, colorful home page running off of their own computer at home, instead of the faceless grey expanse of facebook/twitter NPC social media garbage.
The problem with this is that almost no one actually wants to run a server.
Dylan Flores
Did anyone look into ATX power supplies for 12+ HDD recently and found anything with particularly good efficiency?
Even then most people ultimately used some software to make home pages and the result of that hosted on geocities or w/e wasn't vastly different from wordpress today.
And actually in terms of interaction/discoverability/media sharing running something like pleroma or mastodon is the better choice in many cases.
Jason Mitchell
The ISPs in various also greatly fucked with the ability to do so. Getting multiple fixed IPv4 became a "premium" feature in many cases and so on. Maybe you can't even easily make it reachable due to some stupid ISP-side NAT bullshit.
And then there was simply all the complexity involved securely running one of the older web servers. IIS and Apache and other options with shit like CGI was not easy, and there was no containerization offering any protection either.
More than a few factors conspired to make it hard and unattractive that would actually be better today.
Kevin Edwards
>Getting multiple fixed IPv4 became a "premium" feature in many cases and so on. Well, we're so low on IPv4 addresses that it's hard enough to even get one in some places.
Bentley Ramirez
Yes, well, they simultaneously didn't hurry up and offer an IPv6 /48 to every subscription (as intended) either.
Charles King
>Getting multiple fixed IPv4 became a "premium" feature in many cases and so on. Maybe you can't even easily make it reachable due to some stupid ISP-side NAT bullshit IPv6 will fix this some day, but people still won't want to run their own servers.
Colton Kelly
>but people still won't want to run their own servers I think that's why the ability to run containers rather freely nowadays is quite interesting.
People/organizations who don't want to run a server but just occupy some resources on a server can transition theoretically very easily to being people who run a server, or the other way.
Something which after the relatively brief age of mostly static HTTP webpages was always rather very difficult until now. Containers ACTUALLY can be quite reliably moved/recreated from configuration+data.
Joseph Clark
My dream is that eventually small irl communities (small town tier) will all have their own instances of federated services. It would solve a lot of problems.
Jaxon Parker
The thing we have now is that across the world the slightly more clever people have a viable enough thing that does not nearly as much rely on geocities or AOL or $webhoster or their own IIS web server existing next year.
You can definitely build small or medium sized communities on that (again: see Pleroma and such), and they indeed do relatively well even when their hosters go down/give up business/turn hostile/cost too much/[...] - a reason that in the past killed most of the smaller/medium sites and communities affected.
This is of course not reaching "everyone" that easily since the same communities aren't universally making smart phone apps for completely computer uneducated end users. And I'm guessing this isn't easily going to change.
But there are again more interesting places on the internet that might survive a decade or more, I'd say.
Landon Stewart
psu's are all rated user, pick one with sufficient amps on the secondary 3.3/5v rail.
Mason Thompson
you can buy then for $1/pm from a cloud provider, when it gets to $10, then you can complain.
Leo Jones
> psu's are all rated user I don't find much about how efficient they would be or whether they could turn off their fan at a nominal 20C room temperature if most power draw was SATA.
Those 80PLUS GOLD ratings would be probably more telling if I was making a GPU heavy gaymen PC, particularly because the PSU with 12+ SATA ports seem to be 850W+ nominal.
>pick one with sufficient amps on the secondary 3.3/5v rail. Do 3.5" HDD even draw anything there? I thought it was almost all on 12V.
only issue is that they only have to make one unit pass and they can slap the "gold" on every unit even if they dont pass it since it's a self-applied rating with no control.
Logan Moore
>Why use a 40 $ CPU when you could use a CPU that's 6 times more expensive but less then twice as fast?
Hmm....
Eli Walker
get a unit that can turn off the fan if it's not under heavy load. you dont need 12+ sata plugs on the fucking PSU, use splitters, if it's not a shit unit it should be able to supply more than enough wattage on the rails. >do they even draw there? yes, if it's proper SATA. and drives will spike in draw as they spin up.
