Like what exactly?
My Internet goes down at least twice a year and my electricity goes down even more, specially in the winter. So no, this is not more reliable than cloudflare.
Note that your home network could be good enough for a personal web site that nobody pays you to respect a SLA on.
Unless you have fallback with multi cloud deployments.
You seem to imply that the options are only cloudflare or your apartment. This simply isn't true: there are a plethora of companies that will lease you a dedicated box of some Us in one of their racks, as the sibling commenter replies. Alternatively, you can search for co-location services. Options range from 1U/2U co-location, to half rack units, to full racks, to dedicated areas of the datacentre ranging from cages to whole rooms (I've been in at least one datacentre where an entire room was under separate access control and leased to one customer only).
Usually datacentres are located quite strategically. For example the location of many datacentres in Zürich corresponds with two separate power supply grids that meet (so they can pull from both).
Some of the companies involved are resellers and don't actually operate the datacentres they use. Others actually do. Usually the service is more or less the same, from the point of view of renting a 1U, or co-locating one.
If you want reliability features of a datacentre, e.g. for your office services, but might move, you may find your local city surprising. In Manchester, UK, there's a large amount of dark fibre under the city (fibre that is laid, but not in use), owned by some of the DC companies. Sometimes you can connect your office to said datacentre via dedicated fibre.
Given the price and performance difference between bare-metal and everything else, I am puzzled as to why small businesses that do not need scalability do not go with bare metal. And given the speeds of todays hardware, if you are not doing something stupid and you have a B2B SaaS, it's really difficult to need "scalability" beyond several bare-metal servers.
To be clear, I do not consider my bare-metal boxes "reliable", I have a multi-server setup managed by ansible, with a distributed database, and I can take a single-node failure without problems. I also have a staging setup that can be converted to production quickly, and a terraform setup that can quickly spin up a Digital Ocean cluster if needed.
Linode is down because Cloudflare is down.
Can't login to their control panel, etc.
You'd need to go fully independent and roll your own, with zero dependencies, to really make this work.
For *most* web facing apps/sites, a site hosted on e.g. Linode like this, but not using Cloudflare, would be unaffected by such an outage.
Whilst the incident is happening you'll see the Cloudflare 522 page.
I'm assuming 98.84% uptime is a joke? Less than 4+ days of downtime is something I could manage from a home connection most years, if I had a static IP.
I do think there is some holistic overview of hosting stuff on the internet, where you could label each extra actor that can break things, mitigation strategies, and costs of such. Someone better than me would be able to place relative risk (and I think in that model laying out various provider uptimes/issues would be great!) and offer a smart way of dealing with the buy vs. build question on this.
I still have a fun memory of half of IBM Cloud's servers falling over, meaning that our production app was luckily still up but our staging server fell over. I could get to their website, but their login stuff was all messed up. I believe that one was also a "routing stuff got messed up" issue....
Not in my experience. Things break all the time, the difference is nobody notices because either the colocating ISP is too small or we are.
If you can live with dns round robin between the two, then you can easily host the DNS with multiple providers and avoid SPOF (could maybe host it on the two boxes you already have, too). You're still at risk of domain registry/registrar failures, and failures of their tld nameservers (very rare for well run tlds) and the root servers (not sure if they ever had a widespread failure). And of course, simultaneous failure of both locations isn't impossible, just less likely.
On Comcast DNS failures... Most of the recent ones I've heard of manifested as users on Comcast can't resolve X, but were really X had bad DNSSEC records and Comcast DNS refused to return records that weren't signed properly. It's easy to avoid that by not using DNSSEC.
In the general case of working despite bad ISP dns, you can't do much (anything?) for web browsers, but if you build apps, you can hard code fallback IPs for when DNS doesn't work... But you need to have IPs that stick around for the lifetime of your app downloads.
It's likely to be taken offline by yourself more often than not though.
The internet is an interconnected web of dependencies. Unless you are Cloudflare/Akamai/Amazon/Google there is no self-hosted anymore.
You can host in your basement if you like but you're still dependent on your ISP.
Ironically this is exactly what increasingly centralisation weakens. The huge cloud providers have eroded "an interconnected web of dependencies" into few huge server farms servicing everyone else.