allow self hosted servers
Not planned
-
There is multiple reasons to get own server. Lag problems are just one of them
1 -
I'm pretty sure the company I work for would pay for discord if it could self host, and they're not alone, discord is really shooting itself in the foot here.
3 -
@skyBlade honestly it would absolutely kill off and destroy slack in my company
0 -
@DubbaThony Why aren't you using Discord now? Slack doesn't offer self-hosted servers either.
1 -
@Cooli Mc Tryhard
That would be the slack killer feature. Data-sensitive operations on self-hosted and self-managed platform that has so well-known and such polished frontend as discord...
And for gamers there is huge profit too, discord servers brainfarts are really annoying. I have own dedicated server and hosting it there would rektify our discording issues. And I think everyone in my company would be so happy to switch to discord, but likr everyone and his dog in my company is to say at least, sceptical about it's data security.
So if we had option to self-host it and if discord allowed to do so with perserving proper data safety, I believe it would be able to absolutely destroy slack.
1 -
+1 great idea. I'd love to introduce Discord at my work place (~150 peeps) but our data absolutely cannot leave our own LAN.
1 -
I bet most people would just leave skype for business behind if there were dsicord alternative. Even if it would be locked behind paid 'enterprise license'. And slack is not much better than skype.
1 -
Yeah, this can be a good idea, beacuse easier to Discord staff, coz not needed to keep up more servers for free, and for the community who would like to use Discord offline, or use a self-hosted server for own company. I can imagine if someone have nitro, then he/she can access to the server binaries and host its own server. Enterprise usage is an another subject. But if they not give it very expensive then a lot of people will buy nitro for server linceses.
1 -
Me and my guild have been fine with the weekly VOIP disconnects. I hurry into the settings page for the server and relocate the VOIP location to another region in order to try to fix the issue and it works most times.
Ideally though, if there was a paid dedicated server option, and better yet, a way to tell the server what VOIP server to tell the clients to connect to, and have a dedicated server binary available just for the VOIP aspect, it would solve a lot of issues.
There are degrees of how many features Discord can allow the community to self host, VOIP being the most prominent request, to also allowing a dedicated server binary to be "man in the middle" and relay stuff forward to Discords servers for features that require that.
I understand that some suggestions take a lot of coding to implement, and others might require larger platform reorganization, so I don't expect too much, but at least having a stable VOIP experience via payment or self hosting will go a long way for most people posting in here I believe.
1 -
Basically they will tell you no you can't host your own Discord server because you didn't make/create Discord an you will use what they provide you to use because that is how they keep it free. Do you use Discord unaware of the method that they data mine your servers to farm you for money? It's not that obvious up front but if you were able to Kubernetics your own Discord servers than you could figure out how the Blockchain and the AI scrape your data for blocks and bits. You are making them wealthy and training their AI at the same time. Congratulations, sheephearding is now 1pixel.jpg easier than a backwards P
ꟼ
-2 -
>but we can't have someone else in possession of our data
That's the whole point of Discord. Even if they don't state so, it's obvious they are zealous about keeping all our chat histories in their possession. If they were ever bought out, all that data would fetch a pretty penny.
Of course, according to the TOS, they cannot sell our data. But the company is worth much more as long as they possess said data, since they (or whoever bought them) can use it. It's pretty obvious.
1 -
Now that Teamspeak has announced their new Version with nice chat features, ts voice quality AND own servers thats imo the better product when it comes out
1 -
It's true that with Teamspeak making a more Discord like client and also support self hosting for better reliability I do see that Discord will get some competition, or at least motivation to look into implementing an option to specify a self hosted voice IP on the server settings where you would otherwise set a region, this way you can offload voice activity onto another server that purely handles only the voice, and everything else remains like it is on Discords own terms.
1 -
I'm surprised self hosting is not available. Right now with the COVID19 crisis I decided to suggest my workplace to transition to discord along with a host of other activities they can perform within the remote office and other entities they need to be constantly in touch with. The reason given is data privacy. I'm in Canada and we have to comply to FIPPA standards which means, Datacenters must be in Canada.
I hope the Discord looks seriously into implementing this, the amount of entities adopting this as modes of communication among other things would be huge.
7 -
I think what you ALL are looking for is a solution and here is one I found. You CAN use Keybaser in addition to Discord to setup a bot that connects you to a more secure chat server with encryption.
I would like to know how Discord stays in business providing the minimum effort to enhance their app where there is so many other practical applications that it could be used for. Like imagine if Discord had all the features of the The Padagogy Wheel and offered them in an app style plugin interface? Wow I should get paid to work at Discord, I could bankroll this app.
0 -
Seriously though offer discord for free to business and charge through the nose for support, the company I work for has 24k employees and we changed to Jabber cause our cisco phones are through them and it sucks, if this was offered to self host I could sell it in a heart beat.
1 -
I'm going to throw in on this. Half of the reason I don't use Discord (unless I'm kind of forced to I guess...) is the lack of a self-hosted server. I have an enterprise-grade network in my home and I really dislike not having the option to have a private server of ANY kind. I like to put my hardware to work. I like having ultimate configuration ability.
That this still doesn't exist is an atrocity to me.2 -
i see everyone discussing the security for the users itself... Its not that fkn hard for discord to just add a notification that says 'we do not host this server and we cannot guarantee security, contact the server admins for any questions, support or server issues and not discord'
That would probably be added and fully fleshed out in like a day and it would work perfectly.
1 -
For workplace use, most of us are inside a secured network anyway. We don't want or need to tie in to the official Discord server lists and we don't care about anyone else "getting our data" because it would then be in the same boat as our internal SQL servers, internal web servers, internal file share servers, internal email servers, and all of the other internally hosted services that we use. If you get through the firewall then our stupid chat is the least of our worries.
For home - well, maybe you want to be listed on Discord's server list and maybe not. Personally, I'd NOT want that, so only people who knew where to look could even connect - that's already layer 1 of security (security by obscurity). Then I just have to ensure that the self-hosted server doesn't do anything I don't want by running it in a nice sandbox VM with limited permissions. Handing out personal invites only to people you trust further ensures security by limiting all interactions to a known set of users.
If one worries that "people need to know things to do things safely" then let's start with all of the lousy drivers out there endangering folks on the roads. If you don't know what you're doing and get burned, well... lesson learned or you get burned again. Self-hosting means self-responsibility - grow a pair or don't self-host.
Basically, there's only one argument against this - they don't want to do it. Everything else so far has just been excuses.1 -
Well, there would be two decent arguments against this.
- They won't do it because they want everything to happen on their servers so that when they get bought out by a Chinese company in the future, all our data and conversations will be nicely available for harvesting
- They won't do it because their current server structure isn't built on running a hardware server pr. Discord-server their users connect to, they have multiple Discord-servers pr. hardware server and probably run some sort of large meshed system. Not a server client that you can just boot up on any 'ol machine and bam, you have a server. It would require them to develop a server hosting program that is safe, user friendly and on-brand. All of which (especially safety and security) is really expensive and difficult. And they already have a brand problem with the weird stuff going on on their own servers, letting people host their own servers would probably lead to even more weird stuff.
Those two are their best arguments, but they don't really hold up. For future-proofing, pragmatic and not to mention ethical reasons, hosting your own servers should be possible. And the last point about weird stuff and controversies they should be able to write off with some additions to the EULA about private servers being the responsibility of the server owners.
Another great thing that private servers would bring, is custom file size limits! It would be amazing to be able to share 2 GB files via Discord, for a dead-simple file sharing system!0 -
Right - so, like I said, "excuses".
Item 1 is a non-item - I mean, really, it's not even about the viability of the proposition.Item 2 is likely skippable by using concurrently running containers for each "service". They have to have a "coordinator" for their current setup anyway - stick it in a container and that's the POC for clients. It wrangles the rest of what it needs from the other containers. It's the 21st century - we have the tech to make this relatively easy. See OpenCog for multi-container systems.
0 -
hosting my own server for voice chat seems like a necessity for me at least because I live where the closest server gives 80-120 ping even on this ( https://imgur.com/excGfy3 ) kind of fiber internet, this case is unacceptable for gaming especially on esports titles such as rocket league (ex. we sometime throw a whole game because a callout didn't reach the other user fast enough).
I snapped and decided to host my own teamspeak3 server for me and my friends only se we can chat at 0 ping and I like it very much, but the catch is that the software is very barebones and not fully fledged like discord.
I would love a software that allows self hosting because it would benefit me and other who have circumstances like mine, and it will help free up space on the official servers. a win win win situation.
1 -
While this would be awsome would you think they want to get data out of their control?
There are alternatives like mumble, matrix (both end to end encripted), jitsi, teamspeak. Why keep using discord?
0 -
> Why keep using discord?
FUCKDISCORD I applaud open-source and encrypted forms of communication. HOWEVER, Discord is a convenient way of communicating and finding communities. That last one is Discords primary selling point. I have tried matrix and me coming from Discord, I find it confusing and oddly complex to use. Mind you, I am a developer and I am into cybersecurity stuff. Learning how to use Matrix/Jitsi took two hours to understand. Again mind you, I have quite some technical knowledge and yet it takes me hours on how to use Matrix. Long story short: unless Matrix (which is the only competing protocol/social media with Discord) gets simpler, there is no way many people will use it.
Teamspeak servers are easier to set up, but there is no central hub for people to find your server. In fact, TeamSpeak was never built to build entire communities. It also doesn't look as slick as discord ;).
Again I applaud any open-source alternative to a closed-source solution. However, if it's a lot more complex to use people will not use it. And by the way, I also think Discord handles data a lot better than other social platforms out there (looking at you Facebook).
You are probably coming from r/privacy, where I see Discord being discussed a lot. In the end, I think it's about your threat-model and if you feel Discord is ok to use in that model. Usually, when users from Discord start talking about personal stuff I ask them to download Signal and continue the conversation over there. Discord was never built on a privacy-by-design concept anyways. It was built for anyone to have a chat with friends, meet new people and create awesome communities.
0 -
most of the idiots who said bad idea dont know crap. many ppl including myself we need self hosted servers option maybe make it as paid option or premium . the idea is we have in many countries and regions blocking voip's which leave us with self hosted options that we can run on local network or on the internet but inside the country so the need for the traffic to be routed outside which they block.
and for example KSA,UAE , Syria and many Arabian countries. not familiar with others.0 -
For workplace use, most of us are inside a secured network anyway. We don't want or need to tie in to the official Discord server lists and we don't care about anyone else "getting our data" because it would then be in the same boat as our internal SQL servers, internal web servers, internal file share servers, internal email servers, and all of the other internally hosted services that we use. If you get through the firewall then our stupid chat is the least of our worries.
vegassparkyrich I completely agree with this. I won't promote it's use at my workplace unless it can be fully isolated from the internet i.e. internal private network only.
I also suspect the other big road-block for many potential corporate and enterprise users is the name itself. It has very negative connotations and discord in the workplace can be very destructive to both organisations and individuals. But it's aimed at the gaming community right? So these arguments are all moot [sp edit] points anyway.
0 -
But it could be used to modify the behaviour and dont use bots
Example using Minecraft: Vanilla minecraft server (like discord today) - u have to use real account to make working commands (ik, it cant be / but !)(like moomoo bot on 2b2t) | Spigot / bukkit / paper servers (like what u suggest) - add plugins, change more things, edit even already existing commands like /help
1 -
I think it's a bad idea for discord to allow self-hosted servers. Discord already has its existing security problems but we know what discord is secure but if some discord servers can be self-hosted, they can be used as IP grabbers and you wouldn't know. However, I think if discord implements a system that shows if something is self-hosted then I think it's not a bad idea, honestly, this would also let discord use less money so it's cheaper on their part. I have mixed feelings about this idea and if I were to decide between the two I think discord shouldn't implement it.
-2 -
Ace_Monkey_Ilium every website you go on could be an IP grabber. Discord itself would definitely have IP grabbers on it. Every service you connect to over the internet can be an IP grabber without you knowing it. This is why firewalls exist, so people can't just login to your router from your IP. If someone gets your IP the worst thing that could happen (unless you've changed settings on your firewall to forward certain ports, you would know if you did this) is you'd get DDOSed. If you get DDOSed, restarting your router will stop it, or just wait for the DDOS to stop, because DDOSing tools don't let people DDOS people forever.
1 -
+1
0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
74 comments