Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #72553 > unrolled thread

cellular needed for Covid tracking?

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  cellular needed for Covid tracking? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2020-12-07 21:10 -0500
    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-12-07 21:24 -0500
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-08 05:26 +0000
    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-08 04:05 +0000
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2020-12-08 00:13 -0500
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-08 05:23 +0000
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2020-12-08 15:14 -0500
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-08 21:10 +0000
    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2020-12-08 02:11 -0600
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2020-12-08 08:54 +0000
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-08 16:39 +0000
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? KenW                                        <ken1943@invalid.net> - 2020-12-08 13:01 -0700
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-08 21:11 +0100
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2020-12-08 15:20 -0500
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? KenW                                        <ken1943@invalid.net> - 2020-12-08 14:09 -0700
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-08 20:40 +0000
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2021-01-02 12:57 +1300
              Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-02 03:25 +0100
                Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2021-01-02 05:07 +0000
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2020-12-08 15:14 -0500
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-08 21:57 +0100
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> - 2020-12-08 21:26 +0000
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-09 13:24 +0100
              Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> - 2020-12-09 13:09 +0000
                Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2020-12-09 08:41 -0500
                  Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-09 15:37 +0100
                    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-09 14:55 +0000
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-09 23:36 +0100
                        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2020-12-09 18:21 -0500
                          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-09 23:32 +0000
                            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-12-09 17:07 -0800
                          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2020-12-10 06:41 -0700
                            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2020-12-10 09:29 -0500
                        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-09 23:25 +0000
                    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> - 2020-12-09 15:00 +0000
                    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2020-12-09 09:08 -0700
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> - 2020-12-09 19:45 +0000
                        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2020-12-09 12:56 -0700
                        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2020-12-10 09:29 +0000
                          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2020-12-10 06:39 -0700
                            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2020-12-11 06:14 -0500
                            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2021-01-02 13:06 +1300
                    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2020-12-09 11:10 -0600
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2021-01-02 13:13 +1300
                    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2020-12-10 01:42 -0500
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2020-12-10 01:53 -0500
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2020-12-10 06:48 -0700
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> - 2020-12-10 06:54 -0700
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-10 21:17 +0100
                        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2020-12-11 10:12 +0000
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2020-12-08 23:51 -0600
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-12-09 06:00 -0500
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-09 11:16 +0000
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2020-12-09 10:40 -0600
              Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-12-09 11:56 -0500
              Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-09 20:43 +0000
                Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2020-12-09 21:45 +0000
                  Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-10 09:55 +0000
                    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2020-12-10 11:58 -0600
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-12-10 13:47 -0500
                        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-10 19:10 +0000
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-10 21:29 +0100
                        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2021-01-01 22:52 -0600
                          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2021-01-02 05:03 +0000
                          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2021-01-02 03:33 -0500
                          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2021-01-03 13:48 +0100
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-10 21:52 +0000
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2021-01-02 13:33 +1300
                      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2021-01-02 13:50 +1300
                        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2021-01-02 05:00 +0000
                        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2021-01-02 10:27 +0000
                          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2021-01-02 17:09 +0000
                          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2021-01-03 14:17 +1300
              Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-09 23:43 +0100
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-09 13:34 +0100
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Piet <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> - 2020-12-09 16:06 +0100
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2020-12-09 10:43 -0600
              Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2020-12-09 22:39 +0100
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2020-12-09 22:37 +0100
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-12-08 15:44 -0500
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-08 21:17 +0000
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-12-08 17:11 -0500
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-09 02:06 +0000
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2020-12-09 08:13 +0000
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2020-12-09 10:45 -0600
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2020-12-09 16:55 +0000
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2020-12-09 11:30 -0600
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-12-09 11:56 -0500
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-09 20:19 +0000
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Piet <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> - 2020-12-09 22:15 +0100
              Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-10 09:49 +0000
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2020-12-11 09:56 +0000
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-11 14:57 +0000
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2020-12-10 09:14 +0000
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-10 09:29 +0000
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2020-12-10 08:58 -0700
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-10 21:35 +0100
              Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-10 21:48 +0000
                Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-12-10 14:06 -0800
              Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2020-12-10 18:50 -0700
                Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-12-11 04:16 +0100
                  Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-11 03:27 +0000
                  Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2020-12-11 09:46 +0000
                Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking?  Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-11 03:21 +0000
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2020-12-10 12:00 -0600
    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2020-12-08 08:21 +0000
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-08 15:45 +0000
      Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2020-12-08 15:14 -0500
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2020-12-08 20:34 +0000
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-12-14 17:37 -0500
        Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2020-12-10 08:52 +0000
          Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2020-12-10 10:28 +0000
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2020-12-11 09:40 +0000
            Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2020-12-14 22:31 +0000
    Re: cellular needed for Covid tracking? Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-12-23 19:35 -0800

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

#72577

On 08/12/2020 21.14, micky wrote:
> In comp.mobile.android, on Tue, 8 Dec 2020 02:11:31 -0600, VanguardLH
> <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

...

>> It's the same argument used to scare users 
>> into using anti-malware: they are exposed, so they will surely get 
>> infected. 
> 
> There was a time when loads of email with viruses were going out, to
> almost everyone aiui.  I got 20 or 40 of them.  The AV software caught
> them.   And Microsoft continues to ship windows with common extensions,
> like .exe, hidden. (I dont' know what's wrong with MS)   So I think it
> was true then that w/o AV software, except for thoe most diligent in not
> opening attachments, most, the vast majority of people would get
> infected. 

Well, a good policy is to block any email that contains any executable
attachment. Even if inside a zip. That way you catch virii that no one
knows yet they are virii.

But you also need to block documents with macros or scripts.

> 
> I was not naive but I got one or two viruses myself.  One was during dos
> days, I guess it was malware, when my files started being deleted.  If I
> hadnt' had sense enough to turn off the computer, back when they had
> switches so it didnt' delay, I would have lost more files, maybe beyond
> my ability to replace them.   Was there AV software during dos-only
> days?

Certainly. But most of them would be scan solutions. You got a floppy:
put it in, scan it, use it. They would not scan a file automatically
when you were going to open it with another application.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72581

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> 
> Well, a good policy is to block any email that contains any executable
> attachment. Even if inside a zip. That way you catch virii that no one
> knows yet they are virii.
> 
The plural of virus is *not* virii, either in the original latin or in
english, please, pretty please.

-- 
Chris Green
·

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72590

On 08/12/2020 22.26, Chris Green wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Well, a good policy is to block any email that contains any executable
>> attachment. Even if inside a zip. That way you catch virii that no one
>> knows yet they are virii.
>>
> The plural of virus is *not* virii, either in the original latin or in
> english, please, pretty please.
> 

How should I know?

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72592

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 08/12/2020 22.26, Chris Green wrote:
> > Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, a good policy is to block any email that contains any executable
> >> attachment. Even if inside a zip. That way you catch virii that no one
> >> knows yet they are virii.
> >>
> > The plural of virus is *not* virii, either in the original latin or in
> > english, please, pretty please.
> > 
> 
> How should I know?
> 
Well why *would* you think changing a -us ending to -ii makes it
plural?  In English we add -s or -es so why not just viruses?  There a
few words where we use the latin plural - datum -> data but it's not
the default way of making plurals.

-- 
Chris Green
·

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72593

"Chris Green" <cl@isbd.net> wrote

| Well why *would* you think changing a -us ending to -ii makes it
| plural?  In English we add -s or -es so why not just viruses?  There a
| few words where we use the latin plural - datum -> data but it's not
| the default way of making plurals.
|

   Viri. Yes, most people say viruses. The also
say millenniums, medias, datas, bacterias, etc.
All are technically wrong. So what? You've won
a spelling contest. If you have any star stickers
you can put a blue or silver one on your forehead,
and you can keep it there for the rest of the day.
Congradulayshens. Ure wicked smaht. :) 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72594

On 09/12/2020 14.41, Mayayana wrote:
> "Chris Green" <cl@isbd.net> wrote
> 
> | Well why *would* you think changing a -us ending to -ii makes it
> | plural?  In English we add -s or -es so why not just viruses?  There a
> | few words where we use the latin plural - datum -> data but it's not
> | the default way of making plurals.

Why should I know? My first language is not English. I simply learn from
what other people do, and someone told me once that the correct form is
virii.



>    Viri. Yes, most people say viruses. The also
> say millenniums, medias, datas, bacterias, etc.
> All are technically wrong. So what? You've won
> a spelling contest. If you have any star stickers
> you can put a blue or silver one on your forehead,
> and you can keep it there for the rest of the day.
> Congradulayshens. Ure wicked smaht. :) 

Indeed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural_form_of_words_ending_in_-us#Virus
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/3838/viruses-or-virii

Both confirm that the incorrect word virii is common in IT.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72595

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 15:37:01 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> Both confirm that the incorrect word virii is common in IT.

You can always use the words "viral particles", since the SARS-CoV-2 virus
isn't a living thing; it's simply a bunch of inert chemicals.

Specifically, it's a rather huge single-stranded RNA ball surrounded by a
protein capsid, itself surrounded by a phospholipid membrane studded with
Velcro-like trimeric spike glycoproteins adapted, perfectly, to furin,
ACE2, TMPRSS2, and (reputedly, but more recently) heparan sulfate. 
<https://health.ucsd.edu/news/releases/Pages/2020-09-15-covid-19-virus-uses-heparan-sulfate-to-get-inside-cells.aspx>

Those specific "spike proteins" are what the immune system initially sees,
and those glycoproteins are, almost completely alone, responsible for the
R0 that makes this zoonotic virus so dangerous an enemy.

Plenty more details in the aforementioned thread.
o Does a single person espousing the privacy sink covid trackers even know what a cytokine storm is?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/sAcXqAUyZ_U>

IMHO, only people with adult facultative skills can comprehend why this
virus is so dangerous an enemy, and therefore, why the "pretend solution"
of app surveillance trackers is a political farce that only people who
don't understand either cellphones or the virus itself, will ever believe.
-- 
Most people don't seem to comprehend what makes this virus so different.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72619

On 09/12/2020 15.55, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 15:37:01 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>> Both confirm that the incorrect word virii is common in IT.
> 
> You can always use the words "viral particles", since the SARS-CoV-2 virus
> isn't a living thing; it's simply a bunch of inert chemicals.

Except we were talking of computer viruses.



-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72621

"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
| >
| > You can always use the words "viral particles", since the SARS-CoV-2 
virus
| > isn't a living thing; it's simply a bunch of inert chemicals.
|
| Except we were talking of computer viruses.
|

 Virii seems right, somehow. It's elegant. While viral
particle makes no sense. A protein spike is a viral particle
A virus is a virus, not at all inert. A virus can reproduce.
And a virus with an income below poverty level won't
vote for Donald Trump. That sounds like a highly evolved
life form to me. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72623

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 18:21:35 -0500, Mayayana wrote:

>  Virii seems right, somehow. It's elegant. While viral
> particle makes no sense. A protein spike is a viral particle
> A virus is a virus, not at all inert.

I realize Mayayana is saying this tongue in cheek, but you'd be amazed at
how many people don't realize a (biological) virus is not a living thing.

It's the most basic of questions _everyone_ asks when they study viruses.
o Coronavirus Isn't Even 'Alive,' But Expert Explains How It Can Harm
<https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=229387>

o Are Viruses Alive?
<https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-viruses-alive-2004/>

o Are Viruses Alive?
<https://microbiologysociety.org/publication/past-issues/what-is-life/article/are-viruses-alive-what-is-life.html>

o Are viruses living or non living?
<https://medicoholic.com/are-viruses-living-or-non-living/>

o Are viruses living things?
<https://blogs.webmd.com/public-health/20200717/are-viruses-living-things>

o Are viruses dead or alive?
<https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/cells/viruses/a/are-viruses-dead-or-alive>

o Is a virus a living creature 
<https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia2/ciencia_virus74.htm>

o Are Viruses Alive?
<https://www.livescience.com/58018-are-viruses-alive.html>

Then, like flat earthers of course, there are always the contrarians... 
o Viruses Are Living Entities
<http://www.sci-news.com/biology/science-viruses-living-entities-03288.html>
-- 
All this is covered in the very first day of introductory virology classes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72624

On 2020-12-09 3:32 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 18:21:35 -0500, Mayayana wrote:
> 
>>   Virii seems right, somehow. It's elegant. While viral
>> particle makes no sense. A protein spike is a viral particle
>> A virus is a virus, not at all inert.
> 
> I realize Mayayana is saying this tongue in cheek, but you'd be amazed at
> how many people don't realize a (biological) virus is not a living thing.
> 
> It's the most basic of questions _everyone_ asks when they study viruses.
> o Coronavirus Isn't Even 'Alive,' But Expert Explains How It Can Harm
> <https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=229387>
> 
> o Are Viruses Alive?
> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-viruses-alive-2004/>
> 
> o Are Viruses Alive?
> <https://microbiologysociety.org/publication/past-issues/what-is-life/article/are-viruses-alive-what-is-life.html>
> 
> o Are viruses living or non living?
> <https://medicoholic.com/are-viruses-living-or-non-living/>
> 
> o Are viruses living things?
> <https://blogs.webmd.com/public-health/20200717/are-viruses-living-things>
> 
> o Are viruses dead or alive?
> <https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/cells/viruses/a/are-viruses-dead-or-alive>
> 
> o Is a virus a living creature
> <https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia2/ciencia_virus74.htm>
> 
> o Are Viruses Alive?
> <https://www.livescience.com/58018-are-viruses-alive.html>
> 
> Then, like flat earthers of course, there are always the contrarians...
> o Viruses Are Living Entities
> <http://www.sci-news.com/biology/science-viruses-living-entities-03288.html>
> 

Amazingly, you cannot counter someone explaining (patiently) the virus 
are not inert by an argument that they are not alive.

Chlorine is not alive...

...but it is definitely not inert.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72635

On 12/9/2020 4:21 PM, Mayayana wrote:
> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
> | >
> | > You can always use the words "viral particles", since the SARS-CoV-2
> virus
> | > isn't a living thing; it's simply a bunch of inert chemicals.
> |
> | Except we were talking of computer viruses.
> |
> 
>   Virii seems right, somehow. It's elegant. 



Elegant? To you, maybe. It's nowhere near elegant to me. It's completely 
wrong and ugly.


-- 
Ken

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72638

"Ken Blake" <ken@invalidemail.com> wrote

| >   Virii seems right, somehow. It's elegant.
|
| Elegant? To you, maybe. It's nowhere near elegant to me. It's completely
| wrong and ugly.
|

   I have the advantage of being ignorant of the rules.
I guess it's because the word is so short. I don't have
a problem with "fungi". It sounds right. But "viri" sounds
like a woman's name, or maybe the word that wouldn't
fit on the plaque that says, "vini, vidi, vici". :)

  As you might guess, I never studied Latin. They eliminated
that requirement shortly before I arrived in junior high school.
I've found this an interesting discussion, though. I wasn't
aware that some Latin words were adopted as a translation.
But I guess that makes sense. Viruses were not known back
then, and someone said virus means "poison". So I guess
we have some wiseass scientist to blame for this mixup. In
our usage it's not actually a Latin word. Thinking about it I
realize we actually have lots of those. For example, mantra.
Plural mantras? Yet Sanskrit doesn't use s for plural. It would
probably be mantra in plural as well as singular. But that
would be confusing.

  So complicated. But I don't mind, so long as I don't have
to pronounce "croissant" authentically, like a Frenchman with
his tongue missing. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72622

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 23:36:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> You can always use the words "viral particles", since the SARS-CoV-2 virus
>> isn't a living thing; it's simply a bunch of inert chemicals.
> 
> Except we were talking of computer viruses.

Ah. Good point. Thanks. I stand corrected.

Everything I said applies to SARS-CoV-2 and all biological viral particles.

But not to computer viruses. 

Thanks for that quick clarification, Carlos.

Much appreciated.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72596

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 09/12/2020 14.41, Mayayana wrote:
> > "Chris Green" <cl@isbd.net> wrote
> > 
> > | Well why *would* you think changing a -us ending to -ii makes it
> > | plural?  In English we add -s or -es so why not just viruses?  There a
> > | few words where we use the latin plural - datum -> data but it's not
> > | the default way of making plurals.
> 
> Why should I know? My first language is not English. I simply learn from
> what other people do, and someone told me once that the correct form is
> virii.
> 
Well blame them then! :-)

It *was* a fairly light-hearted comment I originally made, and I said
'pretty please' at the end to indicate that it wasn't too serious.

... and I'd be prefectly happy if someone corrected my french.

-- 
Chris Green
·

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72600

On 12/9/2020 7:37 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 09/12/2020 14.41, Mayayana wrote:
>> "Chris Green" <cl@isbd.net> wrote
>> 
>> | Well why *would* you think changing a -us ending to -ii makes it
>> | plural?  In English we add -s or -es so why not just viruses?  There a
>> | few words where we use the latin plural - datum -> data but it's not
>> | the default way of making plurals.
> 
> Why should I know? My first language is not English. I simply learn from
> what other people do, and someone told me once that the correct form is
> virii.


Whoever told you that is wrong. It's a very common misspelling, but it's 
still wrong. Note the following points:

1. The Latin word "virus" means poison. Nobody has ever found any plural 
of "virus" in the old Latin Literature.

2. Latin words that end in "-us" are normally second declension and in 
the second declension plural, the "-us" changes to "-i." So, for 
example, the plural of "cactus" is "cacti."

3. Note that the plural of "cactus" is "cacti," not "cactii. The plural 
does not change the "-us" to "-ii." Latin words that have their plural 
in "-ii" are words that have their singular in "-ius," such as "radius." 
The plural of "radius" is "radii," because the "i" of radius is kept and 
the "us" changes to "i." The fake plural "virii" is based on ignorance 
of how Latin morphology works.

4. As I said in point 1 above, there is no known Latin plural of 
"virus." The normal rule would change its "-us" to "-i," making its 
plural "viri," but the problem with that is that the word "viri" already 
exists with a completely different meaning, the plural of "vir," which 
means "man."

5. The above four points explain why the Latin plural is not "virii," 
but but more important is that it's simply not the English plural 
either. Regardless of whether Latin has a plural or if it does, what it 
is, the English plural is the simple "viruses."

-- 
Ken

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72610

Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> wrote:
> 
> 2. Latin words that end in "-us" are normally second declension and in 
> the second declension plural, the "-us" changes to "-i." So, for 
> example, the plural of "cactus" is "cacti."
> 
Or 4th declension, in which case I *think* I remember that the plural
is the same (except with a longer u in the pronunciation).

So the plural of manus (hand) is manũs (hands).  I think.

-- 
Chris Green
·

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72612

On 12/9/2020 12:45 PM, Chris Green wrote:
> Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 2. Latin words that end in "-us" are normally second declension and in 
>> the second declension plural, the "-us" changes to "-i." So, for 
>> example, the plural of "cactus" is "cacti."
>> 
> Or 4th declension, in which case I *think* I remember that the plural
> is the same (except with a longer u in the pronunciation).


Yes, but second declension words were much more common.


> So the plural of manus (hand) is manũs (hands).  I think.



If you say so. I can't remember.


-- 
Ken

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72630

Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
> Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 2. Latin words that end in "-us" are normally second declension and in 
>> the second declension plural, the "-us" changes to "-i." So, for 
>> example, the plural of "cactus" is "cacti."
>> 
> Or 4th declension, in which case I *think* I remember that the plural
> is the same (except with a longer u in the pronunciation).
>
> So the plural of manus (hand) is manũs (hands).  I think.

How goes anyone know that subtle difference in pronunciation? There are
still questions on how 'v' was pronounced either like we do or more like a
'w'. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72634

On 12/10/2020 2:29 AM, Chris wrote:
> Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
>> Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 2. Latin words that end in "-us" are normally second declension and in 
>>> the second declension plural, the "-us" changes to "-i." So, for 
>>> example, the plural of "cactus" is "cacti."
>>> 
>> Or 4th declension, in which case I *think* I remember that the plural
>> is the same (except with a longer u in the pronunciation).
>>
>> So the plural of manus (hand) is manũs (hands).  I think.
> 
> How goes anyone know that subtle difference in pronunciation? There are
> still questions on how 'v' was pronounced either like we do or more like a
> 'w'.



I studied Latin in High School, 68 years ago. It was pronounced like a W 
then, and that's the way I still pronounce it.


-- 
Ken

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web