i don't care for, as is a very common theme here on HN, techbro-splaining that "it's a settled/widely known/etc. fact" when it is an opinion.
actually, that's really all the author pointed out - didn't say it wasn't valuable, just said it could be debated. thus goading, of course, a snarky response (including a "random" quote from an unnamed book) about what ASLR does and therefore there can be no debate.
i might agree with you, i might not agree you. but presenting facts, opinions, and arguments to support to reject a position sounds like a debate to me.
what i will also say is that any universally qualified statement about the value of a security hardening feature, risk of a vulnerability, etc. is always wrong until the threat model and all other engineering factors are properly weighed. what is "significant" to situation A may be "security theater" in situation B.
