I guess I should have clarified in my original comment that I was exaggerating - obviously, C++ doesn’t get as bad as python, not even into the same ballpark.

My emphasis was on “don’t use C++ like you would python” because that’s not good advice imo.

Not quite, but smart pointers in the wrong location can be quite wasteful in terms of CPU cycles.

So, basically, use it like you would use Python.

That’s a great way to get performance as shitty as python’s.

2+0-2+2 - checks out.

thanks, now I’ll be policing my own speech for this :D

Cat tax!

For the purpose of protecting important data, the distinction really doesn’t matter. And the good old xkcd comic has a point - for many people, all relevant data is in the user’s accessible storage area anyways. Hence me running almost all internet applications and steam in a jail.

Okay, fair point, let me rephrase: if someone knows what kernel (admin) level execution means, and installs a game that requires this on a computer where they keep important data, they are a dumbass mtherfcker :) Generally speaking though: most people shouldn’t be allowed to use technology - humans are unbelievably stupid for the most part.

we just need one pvp game with kernel level anti cheat

Leaving aside that security patches should be done, if you install that kind of game on a system where you have any data worth protecting, you’re a dumb ass mtherfcker. Sorry, but seriously, that’s just how it is.

Me too - maybe because I was distracted by the irony that C# devs are typically the opposite of sharp… Or because it’s MicroShit and I didn’t give a flippin fuck ;)

While security has nothing to do with my disgust for docker and people advocating its use, docker adds a layer of complexity, which means it is not necessarily more secure.

What is extremely bad about docker:

1. it enables extremely shitty configuration control on the side of a developer. There are way too many developers who have a chaotic approach to configurations, and instead of being forced to write a proper installation and configuration guide from scratch, and thereby making themselves(!) aware of active configuration changes they made to make their system work, they just roll out the docker container they develop in, without remembering most of the configurations they made. Which, naturally, means that they are unable to assist in troubleshooting problems or reproduce issues that users might have.

In general, if you can’t write a good user manual, or at least clearly identify needed dependencies and configurations, you should not be developing software for other people.

2. it combines the disadvantages of a VM (shitty performance) and running directly on the host OS (sandboxing is not nearly as good as on a VM)

3. it creates insane bloat, by completely bypassing the concept of shared libraries and making people download copies of software they already have on their system

4. it adds a lot of security risks because the user would have to not only review the source code they are compiling and installing, but also would have to scan all the dependencies and what-not, and would basically have to trust the developer and/or anyone distributing an image that they did not add any malware.

I have no mistress, and I know no misters.

you lost me at “docker”. The only people using docker are morons and those that trust software by morons.

yeah, that describes my thought process well - I am thinking in words while typing (or while reading, speaking, listening, obviously), but in abstract concepts when not interacting with language, but with objects around me.

From all the attempts of people expaining it a bit differently each time, I think your assessment as a spectrum is the one explanation that makes the most sense, and feels fitting for my “wtf are people talking about”-reaction. It’s like “did you know that 10% of all cars will have an engine failure within the first 50 thousand kilometers” as clickbait for statistical defects…

Still not specific enough. I may sometimes “think loud inside” i.e. think in sentence form / “I should definitely do this” - and I definitely “speak silently” in my brain when I am typing out a sentence like this one right here - but I think that is VERY much the norm if not impossible not to do - because writing down language requires the language center / processing skills of the brain.

Beyond that, however, I wouldn’t normally comment on what I see / do - because that’s… kinda redundant?

Does it mean there are people who really comment everything in their brains? Like “Mhh… this wall is yellow. There’s a doorframe to my right - the door is made of wood.” etc?

I still don’t know whether that means my absolutely everyday way to think the words I am typing right now, or if some people can actually hear their “inner voice” like in a movie voiceover when the protagonists thoughts are narrated in the protagonist’s voice. Or do people have a “dialogue” in their heads? I mean that never occurred to me because at least that part of "mono"logue is clear…

What’s driving me wild about these claims is I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK PEOPLE EVEN MEAN with “inner monologue”. And none of those stupid articles seems to bother to first and foremost try to define what the fuck they are writing about. A definition of the word…

is it subtle, though?

Without knowing the comic author, I can assure you it is!