In your links, I see either a) people responding because some commenter is being weirdly aggressive about an issue that is not controversial and that nobody is on the other side of (like me, responding to you, right now), or b) people pretty calmly and lucidly discussing the relative merits of small performance improvements vs the required development time, or increased complexity, or some other tradeoff. You know, engineering.

It would seem I am not the only one who notices the constant, absurd attempts to discount this simple fact.

The title of this submission is "Bloated Google-cloud-CLI contains an entire Python installation (~300MB)"

I avoid Python wherever possible.

Or... they upvoted you because Python being slow is a simple, obvious, uncontroversial truth that nobody disagrees with?

Do you understand that I'm not trying to disagree with you on that point? The point is not that you're wrong about Python being slow, it's that you're wrong that this is somehow a secret nobody wants to admit, and you're wrong that this is somehow an evil thing that Python should be shunned for. There are no "constant, absurd attempts to discount this simple fact." The discussions you linked aren't doing that, they're just talking about the relative cost and importance of improving that slowness.

Python is slow because accepting slowness lets the language be simpler, more flexible, and sometimes more expressive. For some use cases, this is an excellent tradeoff. For other use cases it's a terrible one. I don't understand why you see this as some kind of moral crusade.

Let's try this one more time. "Python is slow. It's bloated. I do not use it."

There is nothing about "secrets" or "evil" or "moral crusade" or some other hyperbolic nonsense. There is nothing to interpret. I do not care about Python's tradeoffs. I do not care why it is slow.

More replies rambling on about Python only ilustrate the point I am making.