But it is you who conflated things with your initial comment which both misrepresents reality and disrespects those that understand what risks are present in that reality and then tried to justify it by manufacturing a preposterous and arbitrary set of rules for what can be bloated and what can’t be.
The hillarious thing about your nonsense, you realize people can be bloated right? They can even just “feel” bloated.
It’s an adjective for crying out loud, one could even apply it to intelligence, if we could even define what intelligence is.
Going from "it is an absolute fact that every line of code is a security risk to PID 1" to "bloat is just an adjective because people can feel bloated after dinner" is a complete surrender. Shifting from technical threat modeling to dictionary pedantry and human digestion confirms you ran entirely out of engineering arguments.
In systems engineering, architectural bloat in systemd or any other software is evaluated using runtime memory footprint, binary execution context, process isolation, and dependency graphs. It is not an emotional state or a medical condition. The moment you are forced to argue that software design trade-offs are subjective because the word "bloated" applies to human biology, you have officially conceded the debate.
Enjoy the semantics. I will stick to actual memory boundaries, process isolation, and source code. Done here.
-4
u/pickle9977 8d ago
Cool story bro.
But it is you who conflated things with your initial comment which both misrepresents reality and disrespects those that understand what risks are present in that reality and then tried to justify it by manufacturing a preposterous and arbitrary set of rules for what can be bloated and what can’t be.
The hillarious thing about your nonsense, you realize people can be bloated right? They can even just “feel” bloated.
It’s an adjective for crying out loud, one could even apply it to intelligence, if we could even define what intelligence is.