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
"Considered Harmful" is a signifies that the text will be forceful and opinionated. I have nothing against balance and thoroughness, but many authors confuse those qualities with mealy-mouthedness and passive-aggressiveness. When I see "Considered Harmful" I know that the text will have a conclusion that isn't basically "I see some pro's and con's but I don't know guys, maybe more research is needed?".

Yes, "Considered Harmful" articles may be a little tactless and imbalanced, but they are usually also concise, honest, informative and funny. Those qualities are important to me.

>>tormeh+L8
Yes, while the utterance itself is general in nature, I object to (ab)using it outside of discussing software language features (as it was originally used).