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.

I bought both of mine. For next to nothing from a charity shop. Also they’re TVs.

In the comment you replied to they meant video game development companies by “developers” not the individual employees at those companies who do the actual work of developing games. Typically the actions of video game development companies are driven by the MBAs who have most of the big picture decision making power rather than the individual employees who develop the games.

Everyone in this thread is failing to understand that “developers” in this context can mean both “people who develop videogames” and “businesses that develop videogames.” As the people who develop videogames are not always the ones who make decisions like this at businesses that develop videogames those two different things that everyone is using the same word for often have opposing positions on the matter.

In my eyes it’s no different than a publisher selling a book that is in the public domain. You’re not paying them for their copyright, you’re paying them for everything else that goes into putting a physical copy of that text into your hands.

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.)

Do you spend $70 on your wired headphones though? Or are you comparing the durability of cheap crap wired headphones to decent value budget wireless headphones? I have both a pair of Soundcore wireless headphones and a couple of pairs of wired headphones at home that all cost around the same amount and I’m certain I could smash the Soundcore headphones into tiny pieces using the wired ones and the wired ones would still work fine.

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”.

Hey, I just realised that the link I shared was a response to my comment not yours and so you may not have seen it.

This is a recent article about a successful brain implant that has been completed by a different organisation to help a paralysed man gain some amount of control of body parts he previously couldn’t control. https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/ai-brain-chip-paralysed-trial-b2386217.html

That’s really poor moderation. Do you have the details of where to look to see it all?

Here’s an example that popped up in a feed for me just now. An article from a reputable British newspaper about an American organisation (that isn’t mismanaged by a self-aggrandizing, lunatic, grifter) successfully implanting chips into a the brain of a man who was paralyzed from the chest down to restore movement and sensation to his limbs.

https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/ai-brain-chip-paralysed-trial-b2386217.html

There are plenty of people other than Elon Musk pushing tech like this. They just don’t chase headlines as aggressively as Musk’s businesses do.

I’ve not yet seen any indication as to what exactly they have approval to test. My guess is it’s literally just something like testing an electrode gel that goes on your skin as part of the process or at most the external parts that interface with the implant. There’s an endless world of things the FDA could have given them approval to test as part of their project that doesn’t involve actually cracking anyone’s skull open and jamming stuff in there to watch them die like the monkeys did. After you get the approval to test your application sponge on real human subject, you launch a press release stating “Neuralink gets FDA approval to move to human testing!” and await that sweet delivious investor money.

Brain computer interfaces are an exciting field for helping people with health issues that we currently cannot help with. Nueralink aren’t the only business working on them though so if, as seems very likely, they are overhyped and ineffective as a way to chase a good market value for another of Elon Musk’s ventures, there will still be other organisations that do better work.

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.

We’ll to be clear, on handheld PC’s I’m talking about having them on opposite sides rather than at a right angle to each other. But I can definitely see the advantage to the right angle orientation. Personall I prefer to have them in line, yesterday for example I had my phone plugged in to power, with audio out connected via cable and wanted to be able to watch video in landscape orientation. With top and bottom connections it all paid smoothly in a line, had they been at a right-angle then one of them would have had to go straight up into the air out of the middle of the device.

I suspect that right angle is better for flexibility in how to connect a single cable at a time but in line is better for connecting multiple cables at once (really side-by-side is best for multiple at a time but you lose nearly all the flexibility for single cable connection.)

I agree. If we’re going to lose the headphone port in favour of connecting to a universal connection (either directly or via an adaptor) then it’s time we have two of them. As for positioning I gather that there are lots of handheld PC’s with the one on top and one on bottom configuration and that it’s generally accepted to be the best way (and my on top 3.5mm and on bottom USB-c seems to work pretty well) so I think you’re right but it would be nice to see manufacturers try out a few different configurations to see in practise what people prefer.