And the point here is that you don't need to self-host this. One person can host it and everyone else can use it with their own media hosted wherever.
Any media that can be reached by URL could be integrated, even if it isn't your own. That's the idea behind Pinterest, for example. You pin other people's stuff and your own stuff and comment on their stuff and share their stuff and etc.
But applications and features like immich offers are designed with the intention and scale of 1-4 users in mind, hence self-hosted. These same features at scale are not really economically viable imo. This goes for many things in the category of everything apps.
For example, running something like Plex in the cloud is unaffordable for more than 1-2 users with a library of like 100 movies depending on your provider. Youd be talking renting $10000 of hardware or more to host a plex machine for maybe a dozen users with a library of maybe 1tb of images.
When were talking external users the criteria changes. Hosting media now becomes an economic battle of
- How can I compress this shit as much a possible to save space on my server and keep costs and maintiance down
- How can I deliver this content with as little bandwith as possible to keep network costs down
- How can I keep the content cached and available as best as possible.
- How can I police content at the scale of 1-10000 users so I don't get in trouble
- How can I effectively load balance traffic without breaking the bank etc.
- How do I continually police bots hogging traffic and CU
Once you're talking more than just yourself, the architecture of your stack changes dramatically.
I have no idea what either of you are even talking about. I think you don't get the concept, at all.
they are eating menus. the storage is elsewhere. the indexes are small and easily hosted and replicated.
> they are eating menus
XD I like that phrase
Well, I had the dream of meshing my cmnext cms project with nvault, such that sharing media on nostr was as simple as hovering an image over any web client and it would get uploaded and a url inserted into your cursor, all hosted on your own machines.
cmnext is different in that the webUI is designed to be self hosted and for a small number of users, but the media itself relies on a virtual file system backed by ftp S3 or a file path. Which means I have the HA infra to host the media, and a neat and portable frontend to manage it.
I understand your concern of "I just want to upload shit and share it" so help me understand better? You want self hosted or a service? There is no in between, it's either trusted users or the public, no in-between. I think they are two fundamentally different and incompatible architectures.
cmnext is my attempt at bridging that gap for slightly more technical users.
Neither. I'm working on expanding Lumina to show videos and organize events in albums.
I'm not interested in hosting anyone's media. ππ€·π»ββοΈ
You both have a total one-track mind.
We were just talking about a Immich-Nostr fork, so that it emits kind 20 notes with Blossom URLs and stuff.
Who's we?
You and Semi.
I thought you guys could help me figure out how to implement Blossom in the client, but nostr:nprofile1qqszv6q4uryjzr06xfxxew34wwc5hmjfmfpqn229d72gfegsdn2q3fgpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3e82efwvdhk6tcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhszythwden5te0dehhxarj9emkjmn99urf278z already explained it.
About the operating cost, I feel like it is a matter of perspective as well.
When someone runs their own Plex server for example, they can easily justify it as one-time costs, they take responsibility for certain things, certain costs are βindirectβ like power/bandwidth, and they do not see the value of their own time.
But if you wanted to do something similar for a larger user base, now the users see one big number that includes the hours you spend, βinfrequentβ hardware failures becoming a weekly occurrence, and you now taking on risks like copyright.
I would be willing to bet that many services are cheaper to rent than self host if you include all the hidden costs and time and other resources spent.
Exactly! Plex eats a few cores just idling with a large content base.
Like I'm not even making a living of my gear, but I have over 80 hard drives that I have to monitor across 10 machines. 50 cooling fans, 30 power supplies, 3-4 switches. That's just the hardware which gives me far less problems than the software, which is usually configuration related lol.
There is a massive step between one machine I put my plex on, and Im hosting media for 1000s of nostr users to pull, with minimal downtime.
Like try taking down a whole machine without losing uptime XD
i think that it needs to be a big fast cache and many small archive repositories. renting a small one that only answers to you and to the caches you make arrangements with doesn't have to be 99% uptime, it can be down for a few minutes and only the very newest events probably won't already be cached.
