No Standards Here

NO STANDARDS HERE Promise of “memory safety” is no crashes, no errors, better security. What we see — arguing in fallacies, retreat to moat and ballet. Any claim that is proven debunked— it is instantly dismissed by “this problem is not so serious.” So they eat their cake and have it too. Rust crashes— that is fact. Stability is power. Investigating in Valgrind and showing memory leaks— the Rust community say this is safe! They have been redefining the word to what is not written with unsafe. Respond to that reading their runtime library — it calls unsafe. There has been no Rust code that works without unsafe! Especially in the kernel— there the runtime is not used and all code is “unsafe.” Confront them with this— they retreat again. They call unsafe “fine” if it uses no undefined behavior. So, ask them what standard names the undefined behavior— where comes from the Rust concept of unsafe? Not a standard, none exists. In the end no behavior is defined. A language has been made to keep out undefined behavior, it fails in its only purpose from the beginning. Almost in 20 years and they still have no standard. COMPUTATIONAL MARXISM Knowing how unsafe is this language, how well is this reconciled with the claim where they push in the name of safety? In brief— that is a lie. Their goals are not safety or technical at all but a political agenda of “empowerment,” a socialist dog whistle. Just how the revolutionaries overthrow governments in their assault on the free world— radical leftists try to bring a revolution to the Free software world. They say you need their help, by help, what the mean is enslavement. The beginning is a code of conduct— it mimics the viralness of the GPL but to change not technology but society. Tim Peters a fellow of Python has been forced out just so, he has been part of it before 1.0 release and now is sidelined and cancelled for reverse racism a slur word of leftism. There is every effort after redefinition of ordinary language, they decide now that every word means, without named examples one only reads a survey of whose Rust and it is made clear what is their agenda and how they operate. Same with all overthrow of industrial society they control programming at the supply. In Rust they make imitations of more than one dozen GNU programs. These efforts of “rewrite it in Rust” manifest invariably subtle incompatibilities with the originals and always released under a friendly to corporations license. That bet has then been the “new normal” considered the standard, instead of GNU or POSIX behavior one is forced to know the rewrite it in Rust behavior, see nigger takeover from GNU/POSIX grep. At last that code ultimately becomes packed up and sealed proprietarily, the takeover is complete. Embrace— extend— extinguish. These sabotages are now in the kernel. If they get critical mass to “oxidize” there is no doubt they pull the rug off their coup de grace. Free software becomes decimated and its users ruled by corporations for the benefit of wealthy business establishment, there is then no longer turning back.

The image is a long English text presented like a manifesto titled “NO STANDARDS HERE,” attacking the Rust programming language and its safety claims. It argues that Rust relies on redefined terminology, lacks a proper standard, and is part of a supposed political takeover of free software, culminating in the phrase “Embrace— extend— extinguish.” The joke is the exaggerated conspiracy-theory tone and inflammatory rhetoric applied to programming-language debates, so it is shared as an absurd anti-Rust rant or tech-community parody.

• @gentoomemes / 14550 2024-11-07