The charitable response would have been to assume they do have some understanding the broader context, and perhaps raise specific concerns or points of interest.
What you did was assume that they were ignorant in potentially dangerous ways, and assert they should do something different.
I don't think a reading of the comments/responses (at least at your time of posting) really supported that assumption, especially considering the limitations of the medium. Hence my reply to you, while also detailing the trade offs a tiny bit.
I read the entire article and I didn't see anything in there that would convince me this author is anything other than an amateur programmer (I can't parse the section about bruker- is the "amateur programmer" also a director at Bruker who ddevelops medical devices full-time"?).
Please be assured that I put a fair amount of thought into this - for example, I used to do due diligence for a VC firm evaluating proposals like this all the time and we had to reject most of them because the founders didn't understand the basic rules of deploying medical technology in highly regulated environments like the US.
Based on my interactions with the author in the various parts this post, I continue to conclude this individual is lacking core knowledge and wisdom required to execute a project like this successfully at scale.
The article was pretty fluffy, but it was about them not by them. If article was accurate about the role at Siemens they have for certain been exposed to RA/QA work and know what a DHF is, etc.
Anyway and least at they time you posted (since then there were more interaction) I didn't find the same information nearly enough to dismiss their competence out of hand.
I went back and dwetermined that the article was wrong. He wasn't a "director" at Bruker, he was a "detector imaging scientist". There's nothing about Siemens.
So this isn't an amateur programmer, it's a person who got a phd in nuclear engineering and radiological sciences, was a scientist at bruker, has some experience with health systems, and then became a serial entrepeneur with a small company that has some funding. BTW, people who have the job title "Director" are normally fairly senior (old), as well.
What you did was assume that they were ignorant in potentially dangerous ways, and assert they should do something different.
I don't think a reading of the comments/responses (at least at your time of posting) really supported that assumption, especially considering the limitations of the medium. Hence my reply to you, while also detailing the trade offs a tiny bit.