this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2025
506 points (90.7% liked)

Selfhosted

60281 readers
646 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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I tried testing a movie from my home server in plex through firefox and repeatedly got this message, even after reloading.

I knew that they had paywalled the apps on mobile and streaming from outside the network but now they have also blocked watching your own movies through your own hardware.

I do get the point that making software should be able to sustain people but I dont see the move of plex as a fair thing to do. Yes, they have made great software but taking your home server hostage feels like the wrong move.

Even a pop up that says "we need you to donate please" would have been fine. make it pop up before every movie, play donation ads before any movie but straight up disabling the app is kinda cruel.

Anyway, i have switched to jellyfin and it is insanely good. please give it a try. you can run it alongside plex with not issues (at least i had none) and compare the two.

In any case, good luck. Let me know if you need help.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kogasa@programming.dev 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It gets around port forwarding/firewall issues that most people don't know how to deal with. But putting it behind a paywall kinda kills any chance of it being a benevolent feature.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Labeling it as "SECURE" (implying the other option is insecure) is enough to make it seem underhanded to me.

[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago

port forwarding/firewall issues that most people don’t know how to deal with

This sort of thing makes me want to tear my hair out when I hear "Why bother rolling out IPv6 when IPv4 just WORKS!?"

NAT, port forwarding and the problems they cause are seen as expected, just the way the internet works instead of the dirty hacks they actually are. Most people aren't old enough to remember the time when everything connected to the internet had a routable IPv4 address.