this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
40 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1436 readers
156 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

this post has been making the rounds on Mastodon, for good reason. it’s nominally a post about the governance and community around C++, but (without spoiling too much) it’s written as a journey packed with cathartic sneers at a number of topics and people we’ve covered here before. as a quick preview, tell me this isn’t relatable:

This is not a feel good post, and to even call it a rant would be dismissive of the absolute unending fury I am currently living through as 8+ years of absolute fucking horseshit in the C++ space comes to fruition, and if I don’t write this all as one entire post, I’m going to physically fucking explode.

fucking masterful

an important moderator note for anyone who comes here looking to tone police in the spirit of the Tech Industry Blog Social Compact: lol

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (4 children)

I had no idea so much of C++ and the Committee was so closely linked to the military industrial complex. Like people who design fucking murder drones just casually send their requests to them and they read them and care? And Bjarne Cplusplus, the inventor of C++, helped Lockheed Martin on the F22???

No, seriously, sorry, I cannot put myself into a hypothetical headspace where someone sending me a letter "hello, we need this feature to kill civillians better, thanks" isn't interpreted as a prank, since if it weren't then the only acceptable response would be to return a pipebomb to the sender.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago

good thing Rust is only run by Palantir

load more comments (3 replies)