A Case for Self-Hosted P2P Storage
Posted18 days ago
carlosfelic.ioTech Discussionstory
informativepositive
Debate
40/100
Data_storageDecentralized DataSelf-Hosted Solutions
Key topics
Data_storage
Decentralized Data
Self-Hosted Solutions
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
N/A
Peak period
1
Start
Avg / period
1
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 21, 2025 at 7:02 PM EST
18 days ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 21, 2025 at 7:02 PM EST
0s after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
1 comments in Start
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Dec 21, 2025 at 7:02 PM EST
18 days ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 46349920Type: storyLast synced: 12/22/2025, 12:05:21 AM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Projects like Filecoin and Arweave have focused on solving Global Permanence by relying on Global Consensus: the entire network must validate and record the proofs of storage for every file, secured by a native token, mining rigs, and a global ledger. Highly complex, computationally expensive, and not user friendly.
This type of architecture might serve a purpose / use case, but I feel it is the wrong approach for self-hosted storage users that want a way to have cloud / offsite backup for family photos, documents, etc. There is no need for a global market, gas fees, or a wallet. The only requirement is a guarantee of data safety for recovery in the event of a disaster (e.g. your house burned down).
Commercial vendors like Backblaze are currently the main solution for this, but for users who cannot afford cloud storage and have TBs of data to safeguard, there must be a better way.
What are your thoughts?