The future is not self-hosted, but self-sovereign

Self-sovereign vs. self-hosted: what “freedom” means

• Many participants agree the goal is user control over data and identity, not necessarily running your own hardware.
• “Self-sovereign” is framed as protocol-centric and portable: you can move between hosts (commercial, community, or your own) without losing identity or data.
• Others argue the simplest real-world self-sovereignty is still: your own files, simple formats, and a dumb IMAP box.

Practical limits of self-hosting for most people

• Widespread skepticism that the “vast majority” can or will self-host: they can’t maintain routers, let alone NAS, VPNs, or mail servers.
• Self-hosted email is cited as effectively “isolating” due to spam/blackhole issues from big providers.
• People point to unreliable residential internet, CGNAT, low upload, dynamic DNS, and security patching as structural blockers.
• Some envision an appliance-like box (Apple TV / washing machine UX) but others say it would still require ongoing sysadmin.

Arguments that self-hosting can become mainstream

• Counterpoint: in 1970 few believed everyone would own a computer; UX and cost curves can change.
• Tools like turnkey self-host platforms, Tailscale, Proxmox, and LLM-assisted learning are seen as nudging things toward “click-to-install”.
• A “golden rule” proposed by some: don’t host for others; once you host for family/friends, you’re just unpaid tech support.

Decentralized identity and DIDs: promise and doubts

• Enthusiasts want device-local proofs of unique humanity (e.g., biometric + social graph + ZKPs) and portable DIDs to detach identity from platforms.
• Skeptics question what concrete problems DIDs solve beyond adding complexity and new central points (governments, big issuers, or DID directories).
• Concerns raised that strong, universal identity can be inherently authoritarian and deanonymizing if linked back to state identity systems.
• Others argue anonymous, credential-based systems (e.g., “over 18”, “real unique human”, “has PhD”) could combat current dystopias if designed properly, but practical schemes are unclear.

Blockchain / nanotimestamps experiment

• One commenter describes an innovative use of the fee-less Nano blockchain: chaining vanity addresses and tiny transfers to encode arbitrary data (“nanotimestamps”) at effectively zero cost.
• Proposed uses: uncensorable forums, timestamping and proving authorship of text/data, multi-chain payment identifiers, tamper-proof file distribution metadata, and social/media layers on top.
• Community reacts positively to the creativity but the author notes monetization and real-world incentives are unclear.

Decentralized social & “self-hosted Instagram”

• A recurring challenge: how to replicate something like Instagram in a self-sovereign or self-hosted world.
• Naive per-user web servers (each phone as a server) run into scalability (thousands of follows = thousands of requests), connectivity, and uptime issues.
• Participants point to federated protocols (ActivityPub, AT Protocol, Pixelfed, fediverse) where you either self-host or use a community server and can migrate.
• Critics note community servers can still ban or surveil users; owning your domain and/or self-hosting remains the only fully sovereign option.

Security, E2EE, and key management

• Multiple people emphasize: without robust end-to-end encryption and usable key management, “self-sovereign” is hollow.
• Some argue no mainstream system has truly solved user-friendly E2EE plus backups; device changes and cross-platform migration remain painful.
• Signal and Matrix are cited as partial successes: good for chat, less so for long-lived data (photos, archives) and multi-device continuity.
• Others suggest VPN-only access for self-hosted services as a pragmatic security layer.

Ecosystem, incentives, and dependencies

• Many doubt large platforms will adopt protocols that commoditize their lock-in and ad revenue; any real sovereignty must come from outside them.
• Some suggest interim strategies: choose smaller, export-friendly hosted services (e.g. E2EE photo storage with easy migration), use interchangeable VPS/S3 providers, and avoid cloud-specific tooling.
• There’s broad recognition that absolute independence is impossible (everyone depends on hardware makers, ISPs, etc.); the real question is: how many extra dependencies do we accept, and on whose terms?

Culture and tooling: LLMs, blogging, and HN norms

• The blog’s explicit use of an LLM to draft text draws mixed reactions: some appreciate transparency; others stop reading on that basis, seeing LLM prose as fluffy and thought-diluting.
• A few argue that using AI for drafting is fine if acknowledged, while critics insist that relying on LLMs for argumentation undermines the “thinking through” process that blogging is supposed to represent.