"Michael ODonnell" <michael.odonn...@comcast.net> writes:
>
> >> Those who use terms like "immune" or "virus-proof" when
> >> discussing Linux do everybody a disservice since neither
> >> is true.
> >
> >Ouch.
>
> Ooops. I forgot about your signature line. ;->
>
> > I gave careful consideration to adopting my current signature
> > line, for exactly the reason of the problems of conveying an
> > inference of "immune" -- when that is not, and cannot possibly
> > be, the case.
>
> Ah. I'll probably concede any point you want to make about
> the dictionary definition of "-proof" as a modifier
[...]
I believe his signature actually uses "-proofed", not "-proof";
so the relevant dictionary-entry might be...:
$ dict -- -ed
1 definition found
From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48
[gcide]:
-ed \-ed\
The termination of the past participle of regular, or weak,
verbs; also, of analogous participial adjectives from nouns;
as, pigmented; talented.
[1913 Webster]
... which indicates that "virus-proofed" is a conjugated verb,
not an adjective like "virus-proof". i.e.: he's telling us that
his PC has *gone through some sort of process* ("suffered an action",
as my copy of GCIDE puts it...).
In other words...:
> The security-is-a-process-not-a-product dictum
So...:
> FWIW, some term that conveys the "process" idea, or the notion
> that "perfect-security-is-impossible-but-we're-better-than-most"
> would be preferable. I sorta like "hardened".
Not to be confused with "hard"? ;)
--
"Don't be afraid to ask (λf.((λx.xx) (λr.f(rr))))."
_______________________________________________
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
