Self hosting high bandwidth applications is not a realistic alternative to monolithic sites for a vast majority of people and assuming so echoes a wide variety of personal privilege.
@andre I don't, simply because the definition of "high" is highly subjective and relative, but think in context video streaming systems are at risk of meeting that definition for a larger number of users, especially at large scale. Some tech like webtorrent can help mitigate it, but in my experience that isn't the silver bullet folks want it to be.
@andre and in case it's helpful: That's not a critique of the applications or systems, just a comment about the mindset of the assumption in general.
@voltur If I understood you correctly, your statement also holds true for "low bandwidth" applications, right?
@andre yeah, i suppose so. the idea is that periodically folks are saying "hey this monolithic system is bad, you should self host with this other system." And I'm observing that there's some cost to that suggestion and that ignoring that comes from a place of relative privilege. Like, maybe the skills to do so or the capability to get the skills or the time to get them or the financial ability to meet the hosting and infrastructure needs. The assumption that everyone can meet those requirements is kind of sketchy.
Specifically, this is about the push for self-hosting and specifically this is about the assumption that comes from taking the requirements for granted when they may not be.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!