I want to add my two cents in that "run their own server" does not necessarily mean hosting open web exposed services. I started slowly in 2017 and have currently 4 family members' houses connected via IPSEC (one of them cross-atlantic). All internal information exchange, hosting private services etc.
You can argue that for IPSEC (or VPN or Wireguard) you still need _some_ port open, but getting that single port secure is much more hassle free than keeping control of (e.g.) 20 individual web services. And most of it is already set by default. This provides already a lot of benefits: I can try out technology, I am (largely) independent and I can migrate on my own terms and schedule, not when forced by cloud providers. I still have external "hosting", but it is very basic and controlled through CI on my own private Gitlab ( pushing static sites to the public through SSH).
I am not sure whether this is fully compatible with web3/crypto, but to me it was the first step in getting some control back and it feels really good, despite the work.
You can argue that for IPSEC (or VPN or Wireguard) you still need _some_ port open, but getting that single port secure is much more hassle free than keeping control of (e.g.) 20 individual web services. And most of it is already set by default. This provides already a lot of benefits: I can try out technology, I am (largely) independent and I can migrate on my own terms and schedule, not when forced by cloud providers. I still have external "hosting", but it is very basic and controlled through CI on my own private Gitlab ( pushing static sites to the public through SSH).
I am not sure whether this is fully compatible with web3/crypto, but to me it was the first step in getting some control back and it feels really good, despite the work.