this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2025
386 points (98.7% liked)

Selfhosted

46688 readers
455 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Cyber@feddit.uk 42 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Happy for them to be developing an app (which already appears to exist), but at ~20‰ with 16 days left... wouldn't it be "better" to collaborate with existing apps like Pipepipe / Newpipe and direct those funds into the platform instead?

[–] brochard@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

First of all there are subgoals with the first one being at 15k which is almost completed. Second of all a real peertube app is mandatory for its success, like they said 80% of people watching videos are from their phone. This app wont be a second way to watch peertube, for most it will be their entry into this ecosystem so it better be good.

[–] cooopsspace@infosec.pub 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I wouldn't want to associate with an app that's ripping off YouTube when you're an app trying to make a better YouTube.

But also, this is open source. Who are you to say that funding an effort should go to one place and not another? I think the people who actually put effort into Peertube are best place to determine what's good for the project.

[–] 3dmvr@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

its video sharing, its not a crazy concept, like dailymotion and vimeo have existed forever, idk if they still do lol, think social media platforms adding vidoe like facebook killed those as popular alternatives but Im prob wrong

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Isn't there already a mobile app?

Developers can focus on whatever they seem appropriate.

But I think content discover and community (lack of) are the biggest issues of peertube right now.

I hop once in a while to the main peertube site and I can never find anything remotely interesting to watch. There may be some good content, but it's impossible to find.

[–] natryamar@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'd really like to get into the app but its been hard to navigate. Do you have any recommendations for good channels?

[–] lgsp@feddit.it 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What are your interests?

Anyway you could try following this community: https://lemmy.world/c/peertube

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago

!peertube@lemmy.world

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago

Federation still is a bit broken

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I like that they are finally raising some money to do development. This is really good to see.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But it's never going anywhere even less then lemmy. Video is expensive both in storage and bandwidth compared to text.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago

I think they need to find a way to distribute the heavy video parts among volunteers. I think it would be more practical to have it distributed.

[–] HelloRoot@lemy.lol 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

GrayJay has a peertube plugin which works well.

[–] mypasswordis1234@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

but grayjay is only for media consumption. you cannot stream nor upload videos from it

[–] HelloRoot@lemy.lol 3 points 1 week ago

You're right, I didn't even think of that

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It's free, and I see an official Github repository containing the code, is that not foss?

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Source code doesn't make it foss

Windows XP is open source by that definition

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

By the acronym, opening up the source code to the public would make it open source. What is Grayjay missing to be open source then? Accepting contributions?

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

No, that's not how it works. It is source available

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I understand what you're saying. What would make GrayJay open source? Allowing for community contribution?

Edit: I looked it up thanks to your unhelpfullness, and open source seems to mean making the code available for the community to use, modify, and share, which Grayjay seems to do. I'm pretty sure I'm right here, but I do want to hear your definition and argument. Is your issue that the license doesn't allow others to make money using the source code?

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 days ago

Open source/libre/foss all have to do with the license. Grayjay doesn't have a license that meets the criteria because it places arbitrary restrictions on the code.

It has nothing to do with contributions. You can ship the code on a CD and that is totally fine as long as it has the proper license.

[–] Paddy66@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)
[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Because PWAs are terrible unfortunately.

[–] Paddy66@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They don't have to be, as far as I understand it. I've installed a few websites as apps on my phone (because their app had trackers in it) and they can work really well. Examples are Bluesky and Flipboard.

An example where I agree with you is LinkedIn - installed as a web app due to trackers - but they know this, and the whole point of their app is to get you with Facebook and Microsoft trackers, so they make the web app experience miserable on purpose.

But (and correct me if I'm wrong) a PWA made by a non-surveillance capitalist could be just as good as a native app.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Half of the equation is that those making the PWA need to make it well. The other half is that the platform you install it on has to support it well. And Google and Apple have decided to support PWAs as little as possible (in some cases removing support for them altogether. See Apple removing the ability to use them entirely in the EU). And since those two companies make the two most commonly used mobile OS’… well it’s better to just go with a native app.

The #1 biggest problem with PWAs on iOS for example is the lack of push notification support, which for a lot of apps is a nonstarter. Is that the PWA makers fault? No. Does it make that PWA suck anyway? Yes.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

You do know that a pwa can be packaged up in an app container and you won't even be able to tell the difference?

It doesn't actually have to operate like a pwa, and require native pwa sport.

[–] non_burglar@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Pwas aren't terrible. Chrome made pwas terrible.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I’m well aware of why they’re terrible, (Safari as well). However the unfortunate result is that they are terrible.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There are tons of apps that you use that are just well packaged PWAs, packaged as an app store app, and you don't even know about it.

PWAs only suck on when they suck, just like everything else.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

There are tons of apps that you use that are just well packaged PWAs, packaged as an app store app

So… native apps, that interface with a PWA using a web view or something.

There’s the kicker.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yep, just like electron or Tauri. A web view wrapped in a native application.

These are very common these days, it's the same use case and value proposition. Mainly because it's just easier to develop UIs with web technologies that look the same everywhere, never without the app.

[–] mypasswordis1234@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Don't want to log in again and again every time I clear my browser's cookies!

[–] Paddy66@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

Valid. Except on some browsers e.g. Vivaldi you can put sites on a list that retain their cookies even when you clear the rest.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That’s…literally the point of clearing cookies? Do you also complain that swimming makes you wet?

[–] HelloRoot@lemy.lol 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I clear cookies in my browser on exit. Because I want to clear most cookies.

I have dedicated apps for services where I don't want to log in every time, even when they have a web version, because of the above.

I know this can be done with firefox settings (at least on desktop) but thats a hassle.

[–] utopiah@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Well even a PWA still has to be developed and maintained.

[–] atlien51@lemm.ee 0 points 1 week ago