SerpApi.Org
Have you seen Reddit threads telling you that self-hosting will save you money? Here are four self-hosting projects the community raves about that actually cost more than what they're meant to replace.
A proper photo backup solution doesn't actually save you money
It's more private, but costs basically the same
One of the biggest self-hosting projects people say pays for itself is photo backups with a service like Immich. Apple and Google both charge $10 per month for 2TB of online storage. So, the assumption is that you can easily replace that for cheaper by self-hosting, right? Wrong.
A cheap 2-bay NAS costs about $400 just for the NAS alone. Then, two 2TB drives (because you need redundancy) will run you an additional $310 right now, putting you up to about $700.
That alone would take nearly three years to pay back. But, the problem is, just a NAS and some drives isn't all you need. The benefit of a platform like Google Photos or iCloud Photos is that those pictures are safe. There's really nothing that will destroy them.
However, if you host the photos at your home on a NAS, then you could lose those pictures to flood, fire, theft, or even just an electrical surge. So, to back the photos up off-site to prevent losing them in a catastrophe costs more money.
You're either going to buy a second NAS, ship it to a friend or family member's house, and have the NAS back up there—which costs another $700.
Or, you're going to pay for cloud backup storage like Backblaze B2, which costs $7 per TB per month, or $14 for 2TB per month, which is $4 more than what Google or Apple charge for the same amount of storage, with no up-front investment. As much as I wish running a local photos server could beat out Google or Apple in cost, it simply can't.
Nextcloud puts you in charge of your files, but the maintenance alone is brutal
Then add in the fact you still have to pay for cloud storage and it's a no-brainer
Just like running your own photo storage, maintaining your own Dropbox or Google Drive replacement is just as brutal. Nextcloud is your best solution for replacing those cloud storage platforms, but it also requires quite a bit of upkeep and maintenance.
The comparison really is just about the same as with photos when it comes to pricing, though. Google One and iCloud Drive both charge $10 per month for 2TB of cloud storage, and you'd need the same exact infrastructure as above to run it.
So, you'd be spending $700 plus $14 per month to do something that can be done for $10 using other services. You definitely benefit on the privacy and ownership side of things, don't get me wrong, but the project simply won't pay for itself.
Even if you already own all of the necessary equipment, you still end up paying more per month for cloud storage for online redundancy than you do for just paying for Google Drive or iCloud Drive.
Self-hosted AI isn't as affordable as you think it is
It's doable, but only if you're independently wealthy
In the age of AI and crazy API token spends, you might be seeing articles about running your own local AI models instead of using something like ChatGPT or Claude. While this sounds great, it's really not all that affordable for the average person.
For starters, if you want to run a model like Kimi K2.6 (which isn't even as smart as GPT-5.6 or Claude Fable 5), you would need 350GB of RAM/VRAM for a lightweight 2-bit setup, or around 600GB of RAM for the recommended 4-bit setup.
Now, Kimi is probably one of the best and smartest AI models you could run locally. What about something like Gemma or Qwen? Those are definitely easier to run, but they also are far less capable than online cloud models and still require some beefy specs to run.
I have a 32GB RAM M1 Max MacBook Pro and I struggle to run any of the larger models from Gemma or Qwen while using other stuff on my computer. My father-in-law has a M4 Pro Mac mini with 64GB of RAM, and he uses a handful of local models, but only for things he doesn't want to send to the cloud.
The problem is, smart AI takes a lot of resources to run at any speed. That's the problem with locally run AI. Cloud models have basically infinite inference available, and local models just can't compete with that.
If you don't mind using an inferior local model for your projects—which could be all you need—then that's completely fine. But, don't expect to completely replace ChatGPT, Codex, Claude, and Claude Code with a local model running on your system. It's just not cost-effective yet.
Your own audiobook server won't save you money
It's more convenient and you own the data, but you still have to buy the books
I have run my own audiobook server for over a year now, and I absolutely love it. However, I don't claim that it saves me any money. I'm in control of the audiobooks I have on it, nobody can delete content from my library, and I own it start to finish.
But, audiobooks still have to be purchased from somewhere to be played. Finding DRM-free audiobooks isn't easy, and audiobooks just simply aren't free to procure. So, while Audiobookshelf is simple to set up, works fantastically, and doesn't require a lot of upkeep, audiobooks still have to be purchased.
I used Audiobookshelf to replace Audible as an audiobook player, not a purchasing source. So, if you're wanting to spin up Audiobookshelf to replace Audible and save money, sadly, it won't do that.
Your mileage will always vary when it comes to saving money with self-hosting
Here's the thing, at the end of the day, you're the one who determines how affordable something is or isn't. Comparing 2TB plans like I did here only counts if you're using the full 2TB of storage. But, shouldn't that always be the case? Spec it out as if you're using all of it, because all of it is available to you.
If you have an old laptop with a 500GB HDD and don't plan to back anything up to the cloud, then you could replace Google Photos or iCloud Drive for free. At that point, you are saving money, but you also are losing out on some of the pretty big benefits that come with tools like Google Photos or iCloud Drive.
Same with self-hosted AI. If you have a Mac mini at the house that can run some decent models, that's awesome, but they aren't going to be full replacements for GPT-5.6 or Fable 5.
I didn't even factor in power consumption in this post, either. Just one of my servers I run at home costs me an additional $15 per month in electricity, let alone the nearly dozen I maintain at this point.
A small NAS won't cost quite that much, but it still will cost $2 or $3 per month in my affordable electricity area, and maybe $6 to $8 in a higher-priced area—which means that, with online backups, you could be paying double or more to maintain your own platforms.
So, evaluate your own setup and make sure you're running things in the best way for you. But, don't expect to get full Google Photos or iCloud Drive functionality for less when self-hosting. It just won't happen.
