4 ms·

It should be obvious from the context though. "crypto" is also shortened from cryptography, why should it be exclusive to that?

by lawn 8y ago

Fnoord 8y ago
"Crypto" should not be exclusive to mean "cryptography" however it is undesirable to reuse a shortening within the same field. Which is true in this example given "cryptocurrency" relies on "cryptography". Whoever came up with the term "crypto" for "cryptocurrency" did not think it through enough. Especially on any technical website, the usage of the newer and less relevant [1] shortening is unnecessary. TL;DR simply use the term cryptocurrency if you're discussing cryptocurrency. [1] Yes, since cryptocurrency depends on strong cryptography. If the latter is broken, cryptocurrency is also, but so it the entire Internet.
- lawn 8y ago
  I agree that they it shouldn't be used if it's possible to mix them up (crypto shouldn't be used to mean cryptography either if it's possible to mix it up with cryptocurrencies). This was not such an instance. The English language is ever changing, we re-purpose and come up with new words all the time. In daily use "cryptocurrencies" is long to type and say, so when the context is clear it's easier to just use "crypto". Note: I actually try to use "cryptocurrencies" too.
  - Fnoord 8y ago
    > (crypto shouldn't be used to mean cryptography either if it's possible to mix it up with cryptocurrencies) > The English language is ever changing, we re-purpose and come up with new words all the time. Except that my argument isn't that the old meaning is older (ie. no appeal to tradition, nor is appeal to novelty valid); it is that the older meaning is: 1) Far more important than the new one, and 2) Far broader, widely available and adopted (NOT a niche) 3) Is a dependency for the new one. Those are 3 very good reasons why using crypto for cryptocurrency doesn't make sense, except perhaps if you're talking within the circles of that niche (hint: not here). > In daily use "cryptocurrencies" is long to type and say, so when the context is clear it's easier to just use "crypto". Use an autocomplete to make 'crypto' change to 'cryptocurrency'.
    - lawn 8y ago
      Well yes, it makes more sense to use it for cryptography. I'm not arguing otherwise. I just don't see the harm in this context when it's obvious what he's referring to. > Use an autocomplete to make 'crypto' change to 'cryptocurrency'. Yes, we should all install autocomplete in our browsers so we can avoid stepping on the toes of an opinionated commenter. This issue is so overblown.
      - Fnoord 8y ago
        It is obvious to you. However the practice of using that abbreviation for that term is widespread, and is used wrongly and is being confusing all too often. Browsers? Not necessarily browsers. iOS and macOS have native support for that. Not sure about other OSes but hey it isn't me who's too lazy to type what they mean. An opinionated commenter? An? You're assuming I'm alone in this. The amount of upvotes on that comment alone suggests otherwise. Overblown? The issue is widespread, and common.

It should be obvious from the context though. "crypto" is also shortened from cryptography, why should it be exclusive to that?

by lawn 8y ago

It should be obvious from the context though. "crypto" is also shortened from cryptography, why should it be exclusive to that?

Fnoord 8y ago

"Crypto" should not be exclusive to mean "cryptography" however it is undesirable to reuse a shortening within the same field. Which is true in this example given "cryptocurrency" relies on "cryptography". Whoever came up with the term "crypto" for "cryptocurrency" did not think it through enough. Especially on any technical website, the usage of the newer and less relevant [1] shortening is unnecessary. TL;DR simply use the term cryptocurrency if you're discussing cryptocurrency. [1] Yes, since cryptocurrency depends on strong cryptography. If the latter is broken, cryptocurrency is also, but so it the entire Internet.

lawn 8y ago
I agree that they it shouldn't be used if it's possible to mix them up (crypto shouldn't be used to mean cryptography either if it's possible to mix it up with cryptocurrencies). This was not such an instance. The English language is ever changing, we re-purpose and come up with new words all the time. In daily use "cryptocurrencies" is long to type and say, so when the context is clear it's easier to just use "crypto". Note: I actually try to use "cryptocurrencies" too.
- Fnoord 8y ago
  > (crypto shouldn't be used to mean cryptography either if it's possible to mix it up with cryptocurrencies) > The English language is ever changing, we re-purpose and come up with new words all the time. Except that my argument isn't that the old meaning is older (ie. no appeal to tradition, nor is appeal to novelty valid); it is that the older meaning is: 1) Far more important than the new one, and 2) Far broader, widely available and adopted (NOT a niche) 3) Is a dependency for the new one. Those are 3 very good reasons why using crypto for cryptocurrency doesn't make sense, except perhaps if you're talking within the circles of that niche (hint: not here). > In daily use "cryptocurrencies" is long to type and say, so when the context is clear it's easier to just use "crypto". Use an autocomplete to make 'crypto' change to 'cryptocurrency'.
  - lawn 8y ago
    Well yes, it makes more sense to use it for cryptography. I'm not arguing otherwise. I just don't see the harm in this context when it's obvious what he's referring to. > Use an autocomplete to make 'crypto' change to 'cryptocurrency'. Yes, we should all install autocomplete in our browsers so we can avoid stepping on the toes of an opinionated commenter. This issue is so overblown.
    - Fnoord 8y ago
      It is obvious to you. However the practice of using that abbreviation for that term is widespread, and is used wrongly and is being confusing all too often. Browsers? Not necessarily browsers. iOS and macOS have native support for that. Not sure about other OSes but hey it isn't me who's too lazy to type what they mean. An opinionated commenter? An? You're assuming I'm alone in this. The amount of upvotes on that comment alone suggests otherwise. Overblown? The issue is widespread, and common.