allow self hosted servers

No planeada

Comentarios

54 comentarios

  • ad1k4h

    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
  • Vlad

    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
  • Outeanos

    >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
  • unbekannt3

    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
  • Vlad

    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
  • unstoppable mew

    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
  • Marijeeee

    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
  • EyasDmour

    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
  • Heck

    Would probably have better uptime than normal servers. Most of the time when someone's hosting their own server it's something that would break Discord tos, but it wouldn't be taking place on discord servers so they wouldn't be able to delete the server.

    0
  • OleksiiBondarenkoAlexMazaltovAB๛

    Could we use discord server as base to provide hosting for drupal core with docker?

    0
  • DubbaThony

    @skyBlade honestly it would absolutely kill off and destroy slack in my company

    0
  • Rock

    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
  • vegassparkyrich

    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.

    0
  • San Jacobs

    Well, there would be two decent arguments against this.

    1. 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
    2. 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
  • vegassparkyrich

    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
  • FUCKDISCORD

    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?

    -1
  • Rock

    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

    -2
  • Knagie

    For some reason I was logged in under my other account. So here's the response I send but under the correct account.

    @Josua
    Good point I didn't think about sessions before. That would indeed make self hosting possible.
    The problem with the client could still become a problem as people will probably expect the same performance as official Discord servers and might cause confusion. But it wouldn't be a real problem I think as longs as it's made clear what is self hosted and what is hosted officially by Discord.
    @Slyke
    >Yeah, I stopped replying to him because it's obvious he's just trying to argue and doesn't really know what he's talking about.
    If you're talking about me, you never replied to me before as I only posted one message in this thread so stop making it sound like I'm only posting to argue. I just put my in my toughts on the subject as that's what this platform is for.
    Also yes I know a bit about servers and authentication, and I'm aware I'm far from all knowing on the subject.
    So if you have something to add, like at the end of your message, please just add it and don't reply with unnecessary comment's about people.

    -7
  • Knagie

    @Slyke
    > > Well good for you but not everyone is like that and most will put it on less secure to no security server or know how to do it.

    > People can already do such things with and without Discord.

    No they can't with Discord, as it's not selfhosted, and afaik is there no way to steal/snoop someones IP/credentials through Discord itself, this would be possible in theory if it was selfhosted.

    > > On top of that, people would hit the less secure servers to steal data.

    > Lets just ban anyone except vetted professionals from self hosting anything then, or just get rid of all self hosted software?

    Although your message is sarcastic I do like to know what you think would happen if you login on a self hosted server with the credentials of Discord and they would get stolen because it's a malicious server. Discord would get blamed for this because someone with no knowledge of security set up a server and made a hole in the security. 
    If you say "Just let them create their own account per server" it would defeat the purpose of Discord, an environment to easily switch between servers without having to login with multiple accounts. 
    If you have to add someone 4 times because they are in 3 selfhosted servers and some official ones it would become a mess. Same with how the Discord client wouldn't show your activity when you're logged in to a private server. How many clients would there need to be so you can keep up with every server, as you can only login with 1 account per client for now.

    TS has accounts per server basically and doesn't have things like Nitro per user, only per server.
    How would you enforce the features of Nitro on selfhosted servers? Discord would get so many users complaining that their Nitro only works on official servers and not selfhosted ones.

    So it basically comes down to:
    "If they started with selfhosting from the beginning like TS3 did it would have been a different case"


    @Gerald
    > Discord would be perfect for my workplace but we can't have someone else in possession of our data.

    Then you are more looking at something like: Discord for Business and not specifically a selfhosted version of Discord, seeing with Discord for Business they would need to sign a contract or something for GDPR rules if you're from the EU, and even outside the EU if you have Europeans working at your company.

     

    I do like the idea of selfhosting software but Discord has more advantage of being hosted by them then getting all the trouble with moving from the current type of hosting to selfhosting. If they started with selfhosting from the beginning like TS3 it would have been a different case. And there is not so much downtime with them hosting it as there might be with selfhosting, as the status page shows there have been almost no outages, only short hickups mostly. So saying it's not dependable enough is not an argument I would think is valid in this discussion. As said before by Slyke, both have their pros and cons. The way I look at it with the amount of people using Discord already the advantages of Discord hosting it themselves are more/better than the advantages you would get from selfhosting.

    -13
  • devoir

    Ehmm.. This is what servers are for, you can create your own rules apart than the TOS..

    -14
  • Kiwis

    Don't think they could do that since it exposes some of their code.

    -26
  • Rocks the Squirrel

    Well good for you but not everyone is like that and most will put it on less secure to no security server or know how to do it. On top of that, they would bug Discord on there issues making it worse for Discord support to help with real issues with the service than already (as I see being a part of the bug hunters group)

    On top of that, people would hit the less secure servers to steal data.

    There is also the fact they already tagged the post as not planned.

    -35
  • Rocks the Squirrel

    @slyke with a quick search, you can see those services have there issues with self hosted servers. What is really needed that Discord does not already offer for free anyways.

    @gerald For workplace, wouldn’t you also want a secure place to transfer data anyways. Not sure your looking in the right place for that as self hosted would be worse.

    -38
  • Rocks the Squirrel

    Bad idea cause then people would use it for other means then what its intended for and most times a support nightmare. Also many may abuse it to get IPs and more.

    -74

Iniciar sesión para dejar un comentario.