Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.spitfire.i.gajendra.net!not-for-mail
From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: IP
Date: Sun, 4 May 2025 09:56:10 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID: <vv7djq$mk0$1@reader1.panix.com>
References: <vuj131$fnu$1@gal.iecc.com> <vv5dnq$si6$1@gal.iecc.com> <vv5hl8$6k0$1@reader1.panix.com> <jwv4iy113qz.fsf-monnier+comp.arch@gnu.org>
Injection-Date: Sun, 4 May 2025 09:56:10 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader1.panix.com; posting-host="spitfire.i.gajendra.net:166.84.136.80";
	logging-data="23168"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Originator: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Bytes: 1818
Lines: 21

In article <jwv4iy113qz.fsf-monnier+comp.arch@gnu.org>,
Stefan Monnier  <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>> You don't have to like the terminology, but that's what is used
>> across the field.  Sorry if it's uncomfortable, and to be honest
>> I don't care for it much myself, but them's the breaks.  That's
>> what AMD calls them, so if we're discussing AMD hardware, it
>> makes sense to use their terminology.
>>
>> People in construction probably hate that computer people call
>> things "blocks" that aren't made of concrete.
>
>That comparison doesn't work, the problem with "IP" is not ambiguity,
>but that it's politically/ethically charged.  That's why I hate it:
>because I disagree with the politics behind it (and hate the fact "they"
>managed to make "everyone" use it, without even paying attention to what
>it means).

Well, good luck getting the hardware engineers to change
their nomenclature to suit your sensibilities there.  *shrug*

	- Dan C.