From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOTS_OF_MONEY
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 107f24,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid107f24,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-03 12:09:48 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.ems.psu.edu!not-for-mail
From: cross@augusta.math.psu.edu (Dan Cross)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red Code distributed denial of
 service attack.
Date: 3 Aug 2001 15:09:47 -0400
Organization: Mememememememmeme
Message-ID: <9kestr$gm0@augusta.math.psu.edu>
References: <bebbba07.0107292308.d1192fc@posting.google.com>
 <mmra7.6956$B37.222069@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com>
 <9kecu6$f8i@augusta.math.psu.edu> <9TBa7.16564$ar1.61061@www.newsranger.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: augusta.math.psu.edu
X-Trace: boatanchor.ems.psu.edu 996865788 24569 146.186.132.2 (3 Aug 2001
 19:09:48 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: security@psu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Aug 2001 19:09:48 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11252 comp.lang.c:71979
 comp.lang.c++:79780 comp.lang.functional:7273
Date: 2001-08-03T19:09:48+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <9TBa7.16564$ar1.61061@www.newsranger.com>,
Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> wrote:
>Its a silly arguement anyway. If everyone started saying "frobozz" whenever
>they now say "bug", "frobozz" will just eventually come to mean the same
>thing. You can't run away from the meaning people give a concept by meerly
>changing the sounds you make with your mouth. 

Yes, but if you chose a word that has a pre-existing and more severe
meaning, you achieve the desired effect.  The point isn't to create a
new term, it's to reuse an existing more appropriate term.

However, before re-using any terms, maybe we'd better make sure they
aren't going to blow up any rockets.  :-)

	- Dan C.