zlacker

>>chei0a+(OP)
I really could do without "considered harmful" titles. x86 has been one of the most influential technologies of all time and a clickbait title doesn't do it justice imo.

>>n0us+l2
You should write a paper explaining your views. And title it "'Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful".

>>wmil+P4
> And title it "'Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful".

http://meyerweb.com/eric/comment/chech.html

[edit: clarified context]

>>pgeorg+Z4
This isn't an "essay", nor is it "axe grinding". It's one of the best current available surveys on X86 platform security.

Go to SCHOLAR.GOOGLE.COM and search for "* considered harmful". Most of what Meyer has to say about "considered harmful essays" don't apply to these papers.

>>tptace+76
As far as academic articles go, "* considered harmful" is probably as vague and bombastic (read: clickbaity) as a title gets (perhaps after 'Ron was wrong, Whit is right'). Personally I'd prefer a more descriptive title, like 'A survey of weaknesses and attacks on the x86 platform'. But then again, I'm a boring kind of person.