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 -
This seems dependent on a pretty restrictive definition of nationhood? US seems like a nation state to me (as of now), whereas the U.K. as a whole doesn’t, since it contains distinct nations.
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
I'm not going to argue that on the merits—I just want to point out that the *concept* of nation-state, and especially the move from medieval "bag of duchies" definitions of statehood to one defined by ethicity, race, common language, religion—is what the term exists to describe.
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes
It's like hearing someone misuse 'zero-knowledge proof', which is a useful term of art in our world, or 'crypto'. It grates.
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.