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.

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.

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.

I am strongly anti-violence but sometimes I think a bit of torture wouldn’t be the worst means to remind politicians who they represent.

I fully concur. There’s tons of really inefficient software out there that wastes resources just because for a long time, available resources grew fast enough to just keep using more of them without the net speed of an application slowing down. If we didn’t have so many lazy SW devs, I suspect the reduction in needed CPU cycles would have a measurable positive effect on climate change.

mildly amused