Neither of those, I'm serious. I think this approach has obvious flaws (see any discussion about what a "sane subset of C++" is), but complaining about it here while I don't even use the language would be a waste of everyone's time. Instead, I prefer to focus on the positive, which is that there is a lot to learn from those posts.
I wonder if some day we will see a platform ship with an obvious system language and an obvious application language. Right now everyone seem to want to do everything at the same time, and I'm not sure if it's the best approach.
It's also always very interesting to see how programming languages evolve. If I don't change industries, I still have at least 30 years to spend in this one. 30 years ago Java, Ruby and JavaScript didn't even exist, but something like ML was already 18 years old, and records, sum types and pattern matching are just landing in Java/C#. So there's a lot to learn by studying history, and what's happening right now is part of it. I've also followed Go's generics, OCaml multicore, Java's Loom, Valhalla and Amber, and each time it was intersting and insightful. Our industry is all about tradeoffs between change and stability, and those projects are an example of that.