Whenever news breaks of bad decisions from a popular product, there's a flurry of recommendations of various alternatives, and in that mix there's always folks extolling the virtues of hosting your own.
As a person who works on security for an open source project, my spicy take is this: unless you enjoy being your own sysadmin (some folks do!), any hosted solution from a vendor that is currently reputable and currently has acceptable terms is a better, safer option than self-hosting.
@Annalee this is my argument for using SaaS services over managing your own monitoring, alerting, logging, etc. infrastructure. Sure, we can do all those things, but we're not in that business and we're not about to staff up to the point of properly managing and maintaining all of it.
Managing everything yourself may be fine for a small project, but for anything at scale just pay someone else to deal with it.
@jamesiarmes even for a small project, is it really going to be worth the effort to put in all the work yourself?
Someone else commented that their self-hosted data isn't worth stealing so avoiding having to migrate if a hosted solution makes annoying changes is more important. And, well. There are an awful lot of small sites out there hosting someone else's malware (or crypto miner) because the owner didn't think their side project was worth securing.
@Annalee I suppose that depends on what you consider doing it yourself. I thought about this after I sent my last message.
If I were doing it myself, that means running a bunch of terraform I already have written and deploying on AWS, so they're managed services are really handling most of that for me (I enable Security Hub, WAF, etc. as well).
If doing it yourself means managing your own servers at a colo somewhere, count me out. 😅
Annalee
James Armes 
🍉