Oddbean new post about | logout
▲ ▼
alex | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Umbrel does not auto-update. They just make it very easy to press ‘yes’.
▲ ▼
Karnage | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 This. Still, pretty much an auto update 🤣 

Updating your node should be an involved process that makes you review changes
▲ ▼
alex | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 Start9 and Umbrel are no different in their approach here. Both use red notification dots and prompt you to upgrade. It’s your choice, but making the UX simple definitely ain’t the problem. 

Ultimately the reason people bang on about start9 seems to be primarily due to ten31 investing in them and Odell starting to shill them. If you have a real home network, start9 is a complete pain in the ass. 

They even acknowledge it — the next version (0.4.0) is apparently going to fix all the networking issues. I look forward to trying it out. 

I recommend running Umbrel, Start9, Parmanode, Microbolt or whatever in Proxmox either way. Backups become super easy, and you can run more than 1 node in your swanky new PC.
▲ ▼
Uxellodunum | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 Important to note, Start9 doesn't have any networking problems per se, rather they went with a Tor-only approach, whereas many people prefer to expose their services over the clearnet. 
With the next version, as you mentioned, they'll be introducing clearnet configuration, for better or worse (I say this as many people don't know how to maintain clearnet infrastructure, but seems to work well for Umbrel so far).

Also shout out for Proxmox - Use it professionally and on all my self-hosted setups, can't go back to anything else.
▲ ▼
matt | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 I don't remember being able to choose which apps updated and which ones didn't when I used Umbrel.
▲ ▼
matt | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 I suppose an all or nothing update policy isn't technically an 'auto update', but it also isn't as simple as you frame it. It wasn't just that they made it easy to update my node or "press 'yes' ", it was that all the updates were tied to a single update button. I did say that I tired of trying to figure it out, meaning that I may just have missed something. Either way, I think the entire design incentivized what *I* consider bad behavior for a Bitcoin node.

I'm also leaning more toward a Bitcoin node being a single use machine, but that isn't for everyone. Do whatever you want.