FW: AL Digital Acquires Second Nuclear Bunker

[David Hansen]

On 3 Oct 2001 at 8:46, Roland Perry wrote:

> >That depends on whether one believes that "ultimate" is an absolute
> >or relative term.
> 
> "Representing or exhibiting the greatest possible development or
> sophistication"

Using the work of others runs the risk of not answering the question. The dictionary definition 
quoted fails to answer the question of whether it is an absolute or relative term.

If it is an absolute term then, if the building is flawless it is the ultimate.

If it is a relative term then the next question is, relative to what? If it is relative to what is available 
for use then it is not the ultimate, it is the best available. If it is relative to what humans can 
currently do then a building can only be described as the ultimate if it is the ultimate.

I would be happy with it being described as the best available, but it is not. Hyperbole, sloppy 
descriptions, snake oil are all things that should be avoided. However, this is too far from 
cryptography so I shall refrain from any more.

--
 David Hansen | davidh@spidacom.co.uk  | PGP email preferred
 Edinburgh    | CI$ number 100024,3247 | key number F566DA0E
 If I revoke this key, the only circumstance in which I will not be
 prepared to explain my reasons for doing so will be when UK
 government authorities have stipulated that providing such an
 explanation would be unlawful. See RIP Act 2000.