I have evidence of a sophisticated Russian information campaign to get security nerds to say "nation-state" when they just mean "state". We spent TWO LECTURE PERIODS on this subtle distinction in college geography and it all ends, like tears in the rain, so people can sound cool
-
-
Replying to @Pinboard
I'll take this one for the team. Not being a native English speaker and failing to google a relevant answer, I'd appreciate a short explanation of this difference, especially pertaining to infosec literature (i.e., why/where the difference matters). Thanks in advance!
1 reply 2 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @mkolsek
Thanks for asking! Outside the world of information security, a nation-state is a country where you have a single dominant ethnic group that runs the apparatus of the state and defines national identity. So Japan is a nation-state, while India and the US are not.
5 replies 12 retweets 42 likes -
But... India's government pretty clearly defines India that way. And the US? Not that far behind. It seems like a porous boundary.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @twneslscience @mkolsek
People are complicated! That's why there's a Wikipedia article about it as long as your arm. My only point is that it's a term of art with a specific meaning, and that people saying 'nation-state' in all cases just mean 'state', which is shorter, more correct, and less jargony.
1 reply 2 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @Pinboard @twneslscience
I attended a presentation once and someone in the audience asked something about a "state" actor, to which the presenter replied "Do you mean state or nation-state?" I was confused and later forgot about it but I feel I can probably get this clarified here. Please proceed.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like
The presenter was confused and wrong, unless he has strong feelings about the ethnic makeup of countries doing the attacking.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.