From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net
In article <106dji3$3aqcv$1@dont-email.me>,
Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>On 29/07/2025 14:16, Dan Cross wrote:
>> In article <106a04v$2hiar$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>>> On 29/07/2025 00:18, Dan Cross wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm not terribly interested in marketing slogans, to be honest.
>>>> "Safety" in this case has a very well-defined meaning, which may
>>>> not be the same as yours.
>>>
>>> Maybe you don't realise it, but you are *only* repeating
>>> the fake history and the fraudulent marketing slogans.
>>
>> Unsupported assertions coupled with a lack of engagement
>
>Or maybe you just can't read.
Wow. You seem nice.
>> and provide data.
>
>Sure, biased data for worse than wrong models that only
>confirm themselves...
Actually, I was suggesting that _you_ provide some data.
>Meanwhile real production is in the
>hands of the marketing and project management guys, while
>at writing code you want the computer scientists, in that
>proving that you not haven't got the faintest idea what
>software even means, but also you haven't got a clue
>where your own discipline starts and where it ends!
You haven't shown any code. You haven't made any technical
arguments. You haven't shown any data. You've just thrown out
insults and made a bunch of vague assertions about...something;
none of it really makes a lot of sense.
Anyway, ad hominem attacks are not persuasive, either.
>Indeed, I was a top notch consultant in my area and giving
>university lessons on technology and technologies up to the
>'90, i.e. before SE or CS even existed as faculties. Then
>the fucking locusts descended on us, and the fucking frauds
>all just to happy to jump on yet another bandwagon...
>
>Sure, do open a comp.lang.rust, you have no fucking
>clue what "picky" even means.
*shrug* Ok, dude. Whatever you say. 8-/
- Dan C.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
