Not having to do everything yourself, but being able to
Delegating tasks while keeping the ability to act when needed.
I like opening things up. Sometimes out of curiosity, sometimes because “but it works” is not enough of an explanation. That does not mean I think everyone should run their own infrastructure.
I want to be able to delegate tasks and still understand what is happening. If the need arises, I want to be able to carry out the important steps myself: back up data, narrow down a fault or prepare to switch services. Not as a daily obligation, but as an option I deliberately keep available and occasionally put to the test.
Running my own server does not remove my dependence on electricity, software, spare parts or other people’s knowledge. It moves tasks and responsibilities. That can be the right choice. It can also mean more work than someone wants to take on over the long term.
For me, “being able to” does not mean having to master everything alone. It also means knowing my limits and recognising when I need support. Complete control is not my goal. I want to understand my dependencies and have a say in how they work.
So I care less about the label “independent” than a practical question: what can I do when the solution I chose no longer works for me? Can I get my data out? Do I know who is responsible? Is there a workable way to switch? Can someone else take over if I am unavailable?
I want to be able to ask these questions when someone else runs the service, too. Accepting help does not mean giving up autonomy. What concerns me is being unable to understand the terms or realistically change them.
I want technology that makes cooperation possible without turning it into a one-way street. Delegating tasks without giving up my ability to act: that is the room for manoeuvre I want to preserve.
A standalone essay on the questions behind my book project, not an extract from the manuscript. Autonomy Despite the System
Back to home