Received: from localhost ([::1]:42974 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Ttnal-0003aA-G7; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:00:51 -0800 Received: from mail-ee0-f50.google.com ([74.125.83.50]:46204) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Ttnab-0003a3-5W for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:00:48 -0800 Received: by mail-ee0-f50.google.com with SMTP id e51so395765eek.9 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:00:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=XqMfeoLl51oJonTm4Ffb7WIXx+A9roP6EDw6K3J/ds4=; b=BAM2/v1oqxnvmXPSvBoOeFF70UcxR+LfHDg/epWVpsnMYl7g8upMBO3HgriH36YfKp oOyy8y15g1Cv+QUpPjSbPqwxpm9lfyQKRhhbqq0iry21NRIVDX8jVwZsPCSucRCBblBA grVN0HJo/TnsXhJL6VO8ZWWe1yyoulhwL3GORAmmCXsg20rc78nqjIbwIwVWvLDf1pmj TVhMq/rn7oBkKgter+pn00JrXFe4PleKWrWGlHyTZcCpeiwI8cs5xjZztg06Sdrb2Kn/ 9GSLsJ3ObwrUuXFnuMD6QTgnaeqqLTcUZ1w3Yh8IM/3VeYsrqT8CGQ24XSsHTvaYyQ/2 Ce6A== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.202.3 with SMTP id c3mr205498776eeo.4.1357945195770; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:59:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.151.16 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:59:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1787963.147olisiCP@caracal> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:59:55 -0500 Message-ID: From: Eitan Postavsky To: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.2 X-Spam_score_int: 2 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On closer inspection, I see that in both cases you're actually expressing {termifsle}, the smallest unit that is handled by a coding system. Okay. In that case, I fall back on my suggestion that it would not hurt to give it both meanings, to be disambiguated (or not) by context. And consider using {termifsle}, not {mifsle} :P [...] Content analysis details: (0.2 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (eitanp32[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (eitanp32[at]gmail.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Subject: Re: [jbovlaste] mifsle X-BeenThere: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: jbovlaste@lojban.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1711250484355932204==" Errors-To: jbovlaste-bounces@lojban.org --===============1711250484355932204== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b3436ac04b4b704d30b41bb --047d7b3436ac04b4b704d30b41bb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On closer inspection, I see that in both cases you're actually expressing {termifsle}, the smallest unit that is handled by a coding system. Okay. In that case, I fall back on my suggestion that it would not hurt to give it both meanings, to be disambiguated (or not) by context. And consider using {termifsle}, not {mifsle} :P On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Eitan Postavsky wrote: > Strictly speaking, the second place structure is for {selmifsle}, while > the first is for {mifsle}. I don't think it would hurt for {mifsle} to have > both meanings, do you? That said, it seems easy enough to coin both words: > {mifsle} for block of a cipher, {selmifsle} for block of some plaintext. > That's what I would do. > > I'm pretty sure that in the genetic code, the amino acid is the plaintext, > because amino acids do all the useful protein magic while codons just sit > there in an easy-to-manipulate format. > > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Pierre Abbat wrote: > >> I proposed this word for "codon", but it could also mean "block of a >> cipher". >> Should the place structure be "x1 is the smallest ciphertext that can be >> decrypted by x2" or "x1 is the smallest plaintext that can be encrypted by >> x2"? In the genetic code, which is plaintext, the codon or the amino acid? >> >> Pierre >> -- >> The Black Garden on the Mountain is not on the Black Mountain. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jbovlaste mailing list >> jbovlaste@lojban.org >> http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/jbovlaste >> > > --047d7b3436ac04b4b704d30b41bb Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On closer inspection, I see that in both cases you're actually expressi= ng {termifsle}, the smallest unit that is handled by a coding system. Okay.= In that case, I fall back on my suggestion that it would not hurt to give = it both meanings, to be disambiguated (or not) by context. And consider usi= ng {termifsle}, not {mifsle} :P

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Eitan Posta= vsky <eitanp32@gmail.com> wrote:
Strictly speaking, the second place structure is for {selmifsle}, while the= first is for {mifsle}. I don't think it would hurt for {mifsle} to hav= e both meanings, do you? That said, it seems easy enough to coin both words= : {mifsle} for block of a cipher, {selmifsle} for block of some plaintext. = That's what I would do.

I'm pretty sure that in the genetic code, the amino acid is the pla= intext, because amino acids do all the useful protein magic while codons ju= st sit there in an easy-to-manipulate format.


On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Pierre Abbat <phma@bezitopo.org= > wrote:
I proposed this word for "codon", but it could also mean "bl= ock of a cipher".
Should the place structure be "x1 is the smallest ciphertext that can = be
decrypted by x2" or "x1 is the smallest plaintext that can be enc= rypted by
x2"? In the genetic code, which is plaintext, the codon or the amino a= cid?

Pierre
--
The Black Garden on the Mountain is not on the Black Mountain.


_______________________________________________
jbovlaste mailing list
jbovlaste@l= ojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/jbovlaste


--047d7b3436ac04b4b704d30b41bb-- --===============1711250484355932204== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ jbovlaste mailing list jbovlaste@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/jbovlaste --===============1711250484355932204==--