There could be. How would you know?

Anyway, I don’t think the world needs 20 different alternatives to Twitter, just like we don’t need 20 alternatives to Linux, Python, the W3C, or Rust.

What seems ideal is a single dominant system run by people whose authority comes from a broad consensus of the stakeholders, plus a limited number of competitors that could conceivably take over, but only if the dominant system is badly mismanaged. Having alternatives keeps the market leaders honest and provides space to try out new ideas that can either serve a different niche or be incorporated into the dominant system, but in a space where compatibility and network effects are so important, I want there to be a clear leader that most users can rally around, and that most developers can target to benefit the greatest number of users.

I applaud the writers of that episode for doing that, but I’ve seen too many episodes/movies where people use alien technology with no indication they have a hard time with the interface, or where a Federation ship outright trades equipment with previously uncontacted aliens, and it just works. Hell, even Trip’s reproductive system is so compatible with an alien’s that she can get him pregnant! And don’t even get me started on how often people just walk up and use a control panel to access sensitive systems without needing to present any kind of credentials.

That’s called having just one distro.

I’m not gonna listen to Geordi because he lives in an alternate universe where everything is compatible with everything else.

Maybe try not habitually exaggerating? People who don’t know you are just gonna take you at your word.

whether the software is memory safe depends on the expertise of the devs

No. Just stop. If a language depends on the expertise of the developer to be free of memory bugs, then by definition, it is not memory safe because memory safety means such bugs are impossible by design. Quit trying to redefine what memory safety means. A program being free of memory bugs does not in any way imply memory safety.

Ah yes, I love how C++ is has so little boilerplate. Sometimes I can even write several statements in a row without any!

If the standard is “you know what you’re doing and never make mistakes”, then all languages are memory safe. All you’re doing is arguing against memory safety as a concept by redefining the term in such a way that it becomes meaningless.

It’s the only operating system with that much market share to lose.

I’m very experienced with C++and I still feel like I’m juggling chainsaws every time I use it. And I’ve personally run into into things like use after free errors while working in Chromium. It’s a massive codebase full of multithreading, callbacks, and nonlocal effects. Managing memory may be easy in a simple codebase but it’s a nightmare in Chromium. Tools like AddressSanitizer are a routine part of Chrome development for exactly that reason. And people who think memory management is easy in C++ are precisely the people I expect to introduce a lot of bugs.

Alas, the longer the stick is, the floppier it gets.

Are you unfamiliar with the principal that things which are appropriate for adults are often not appropriate for children?

Is this a meme about baby leftists learning about how plurality voting works?