AFAIK it’s a system to let Linux software bundle all of it’s dependencies up with it so it just works in a self contained way that doesn’t care about what else is and isn’t installed.

Advantages is that they are more reliable and user friendly than traditional approaches to Linux software installation.

Disadvantages are that they have bigger footprints where you might have the same dependencies I dependently installed for each app rather than as a single installation that they all utilise and that they need to be updated individually (as part of the flatpak.) IE if basically every app uses the same dependency and it turns out to have a huge security hole, under normal Linux software the developer would patch it, you’d update it and the hole would be filled. With Flatpaks you need each individual Flatpak developer to update the version used by their Flatpak and for you to update all those Flatpaks before the hole is plugged. I think I remember they run in some kind of sandbox to mitigate this though.

It had nothing to do with From Software but Elden Ring actually ran better on Linux than on any other platform shortly after release (there was a silly bug that affected performance on all platforms that Valve fixed within Proton.)

Yet the solution is so simple. Let the them spend 20 – 35 % of their paid time on backlog. Let them refactor the architecture. Let them improve the code base. You know, that thing the Lean book talks about, the part that everyone overlooks, the part so critical yet so often overlooked that others wrote books that ride that one aspect home.

But why do that when instead you can just pretend those issues don’t exist (or simply fail to understand them) and secure a bonus/promotion/personal favour by cutting “unnessecary” labour costs then celebrate by burbling on about how capitalism “maximises efficiency”.

It certainly does pose an issue from that perspective but I’m not sure any more than websites in general. It’s not actually that hard to rip off a website’s design and so it’s quite common to see phishing scams of that nature. In some sense it’s less likely to happen with people impersonating a Lemmy instance simply because actually setting up and running one is more work than impersonating just a regular website.

Yes, someone could create an instance called “officiallemmyinstancedotcom” and pretend to be the one single official lemmy to try to trap people searching for Lemmy not entirely knowing what it is, but I don’t think the fact that people already think places like lemmy.ml or lemmy.world are synonymous with Lemmy is a prerequisite for someone doing that. If anything, people who mistakenly think one of those two is the only “real” Lemmy are probably less likely to be taken in by a malicious one.

Still…

Providing clearer on site messaging to help avoid this sort of confusion sounds like something a good UX designer could perhaps assist the Lemmy FOSS project with?

They’re using a Mastodon account and the post they made is on the Lemmy.ml instance.

Yeah no problem. It gets confusing because Lemmy, Kbin, Mastodon and the other big one I currently forget the name of are all their own set of software that people use to make their own instances with that can all talk to each other across the different instances and platforms but also, many of the big instances use the name of the software they use as part of their own name. ie mastodon.cloud (which is how you are presumably accessing this conversation) is a Mastodon instance (or whatever term is used for the Mastodon equivalent of a lemmy instance) but it is not Mastodon itself, just one example of Mastodon in action. Similarly in Lemmy-land you have major instances called beehaw.org (a Lemmy instance that my account is on and through which I am interacting with this post), lemmy.ml (which is the instance this post is actually on and is the oldest Lemmy instance run by the people who started the FOSS Lemmy project) and lemmy.world (the biggest Lemmy instance.) All three of those instances are run by entirely different people for different purposes and they all intercommunicate (to some degree, I think maybe beehaw.org currently is defederated from lemmy.world due to the challenges of moderating users from a large open instance in line with beehaw’s goals), they are all Lemmy instances but none of them are actually the Lemmy FOSS itself. However, people often think that either lemmy.ml or lemmy.world is exactly synonymous with Lemmy or that beehaw.org is a seperate thing.

Really imo all the Fediverse stuff should have set a standard that would require consistent clear naming across all instances (IE, perhaps they could all be required to have an actual name independent of the name of the underlying technology and then also include what they actually are, ie beehaw-lemmy.org, beehaw-mastodon.org etc) but we’re well past that point now I think.

You actually posted to a Lemmy instance from your Mastodon one fwiw.

I’m trying to pick ones with meaningfully different aims so that I can try to keep some sort of separation in my head. Otherwise I’d quickly lose track of what conversation having where, with whom and why.

This is the appropriate time and place to discuss the codebase and project management approach of the Lemmy FOSS project. If you don’t like hearing people you disagree with talk about those things, you should be going to do something else rather than rudely trying to make them shut up. Even from the perspective that you just want to challenge this user about the appropriateness of how they are expressing their opinions and frustrations, you are going too far and behaving inappropriately yourself with all the personal attacks. Just leave it alone and if they are saying things that you feel need to be addressed just report and move on.

If it helps clarify things for you, the person you are arguing with doesn’t understand what you are trying to say with regards to how autism informs your interactions with others online and is arguing against a point you aren’t trying to make. They are however entirely too dug into arguing against that point to easily and effectively get them to understand what you are actually saying and respond to that without the baggage of already deciding that they entirely disagree with you to the point they think they are entitled to be rude to you because you don’t agree with them.

The conversation you are in in this thread is more difficult than it ought to be and while some element of that may be due to your autism, there’s also a lot of failures from the other side of it making the conversation harder than it should be. At this point you are not being treated kindly and respectfully by the other person (because they are frustrated and handling it poorly.) Better to just disengage with them and shrug it off as a misunderstanding and bad behaviour not of your making as best as you are able to do so.