The octopus analogy seems especially appropriate. The thing about the legs on an actual octopus is that there's a bunch of local compute substrate in them, if you were to nail extra legs onto the octopus those are rubbish compared to its real legs which can think.

For example, move semantics are a peg leg for the octopus. Should an octopus have a peg leg? I'm not a biologist of any sort, but my guess is "No". I can see why C++ wanted to add move (without this performance in some scenarios is just awful) and yet since C++ didn't start out having move semantics and can't give up backward compatibility it has to shoehorn them in with this awkward "hollowed out object" idea. The result is performance still isn't where it could be and the feature is unergonomic.