[Medh_Suk]

I wonder if these services will ever reach mass adoption.

I consider myself to be technological advanced, but other than niche photographer, i wonder if 99.99 % of population would ever go through the effort of setting such a service ?

[post-it]

I dream of selling a Box that plugs into the wall that backs up all of your photos and videos and maybe acts as an ActivityPub server, and you can add your friends who also have a Box, and your friends' Boxes back up all of your photos and vice versa.

The added benefit of integrating federated social media is that if you want to share a file with your friends, there's zero load time because the file is already backed up on their Box, or it's striped across multiple Boxes and downloads quickly.

It would have to be dirt cheap though, like a Chromecast.

[swaroop]

Like https://umbrel.com/ ? (no affiliation)

[rounakdatta]

Damn, this is pretty! I was thinking of self-building such a setup with a Mac Mini.

[mulmen]

Wow, yes. That. Do you have one?

[mulmen]

Honestly I think Apple has a good model for this. The value would be in making the box plug-and-play. Apple has proven people will pay a premium for devices that Just Work. It could still be built on open software. Some kind of a cross between Apple’s opinionated approach to defaults and RedHat’s pay-for-support model of developing open source software.

[dangus]

Y'all are literally unironically pitching The Box from the TV show Silicon Valley.

What is the problem being solved here? Apple already offers a solution – iCloud.

Why would they want to sell you a box for offline backups?

[mulmen]

The problem being solved here is data locality. This idea predates the TV show by literally decades.

Apple doesn’t want to sell us a box. They want to sell us a subscription. My assertion is that Apple’s model of selling hardware would work for home servers.

[dangus]

I repeat myself: focus your mind on the value, or the problem the customer is looking to solve. Data locality isn’t a problem, it’s an implementation choice or detail.

The problem is something like: “I need to keep my family photos/files safe” or “I need to store customer orders and data” or “I need a way to protect my data when I drop my phone in the toilet.”

Even giant companies with eye-watering IT budgets see the appeal of having someone else manage their physical hardware and software infrastructure.. I haven’t worked at a company that owned its own servers in nearly a decade.

Apple doesn’t want to sell us a box and coincidentally nobody wants to buy a box.

[mulmen]

Home hosting protects from institutional threats like governments, TLAs, and LEO. Cloud providers can’t offer that. They’re a huge target and it’s an open secret they are compromised. Apple even tried to pitch that as a feature. And they’re the leaders in privacy!

It’s easy to reason about data locality. I can have a literal social network of just my actual friends and no tech company gets to spy on it.

Cloud backups are still good for disaster recovery if they are fully encrypted.

[post-it]

Yeah, the Apple TV should do it.

[dangus]

Okay, crazy idea. What if you didn't even need a piece of hardware and the service included online storage? It would simplify it even more for the end user so they didn't have to plug in hardware and maintain it. We could call this service something like eOnlineStorage or iBackupPhotos, maybe charge a varying price up to $9.99 a month for it.

[post-it]

Box would be a one-time purchase. There's no maintenance involved - if it breaks, you just buy a new one and log in, and redownload all of your data from your friends.

[dangus]

Who is paying for the hard drives?

[mulmen]

They used to have the AirPort which was pretty much iCloud at home. And the early iPod was intended to be a portable personal profile you could plug in to any Mac. We’re not on the best timeline.

[rakoo]

Something like a freedombox (https://www.freedombox.org/) ?

Or the internet cube (https://internetcu.be/) ?

[grudg3]

Gavin Belson had the right vision after all.

[joking]

like a synology or qnap nas?

I use synology myself, don't have experience with qnap but I think it will be pretty similar. plug the box, activate the service, download the phone app and your photos are automatically synced and browsable from the device. You can add other services but the basic functionality is there.

[anderspitman]

Why does it need to be a new separate physical device, instead of just software installed on an old phone or laptop?

[post-it]

Because nobody outside of HN is going to install software on an old phone or laptop. But they'll buy a $30 Box.

By all means the software will be open-source (and mostly off-the-shelf if possible) so anyone can install it on whatever device they have, but the killer product will be the Box.

[anderspitman]

> Because nobody outside of HN is going to install software on an old phone or laptop. But they'll buy a $30 Box.

How do you figure?

Also you may be interested in checking out https://kubesail.com/homepage and https://privaterouter.com/

[dangus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSZOf9pyepc