On 9/25/07, Adrian Griffis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I understand why this descriptivist approach is tempting over a
> prescriptivist approach. But it's important, I think, to keep in mind
> that the public uses the word "illegal" when they really mean
> "unlawful" and uses the word "Schizophr
On 9/25/07, Gadi Evron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No longer good enough.
>
> We can get a press scare over a public vuln release, or a wake-up call.
>
> I think we can do better as an industry.
>
Who, then, rewrites all of the reference material? And doesn't any new
definition simply become def
On 9/25/07, Gadi Evron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay. I think we exhausted the different views, and maybe we are now able
> to come to a conlusion on what we WANT 0day to mean.
>
> What do you, as professional, believe 0day should mean, regardless of
> previous definitions?
Seems to me that
