Xref: utzoo news.sysadmin:1373 sci.bio:1586
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!dutrun!hans
From: hans@duttnph.UUCP (Hans Buurman)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,sci.bio
Subject: Re: Worm vs. Virus
Summary: it's a rabbit !
Message-ID: <544@dutrun.UUCP>
Date: 11 Nov 88 18:50:07 GMT
References: <5330@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <3595@phri.UUCP> <1617@edsel>
Sender: tnphnws@dutrun.UUCP
Reply-To: hans@duttnph.UUCP (Hans Buurman)
Organization: Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
Lines: 29

In article <1617@edsel> kdo@lucid.com writes:
>In article <3595@phri.UUCP> roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes:
>>spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford) writes:
>>> (Note -- it's a worm, not a virus, since it can replicate itself and
>>> does not hide itself inside other code.)
>>(...)  She says that
>>the distinction of not hiding inside other code is better described by
>>calling them lytic viruses and lysogenic viruses instead of worms and
>>viruses.  Anybody for electronic transposons?
>(...)  I
>favor the first analogy, and I think the lytic/lysogenic terms are
>good ones, but somehow I can't see them getting used much by the news
>media.

If you look at the reproduction rate, shouldn't this program be called
a rabbit ?

:-)

	Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Buurman                   | hans@duttnph.UUCP
Pattern Recognition Group      | mcvax!dutrun!duttnph!hans
Faculty of Applied Physics     | tel. 31 - (0) 15 - 78 46 94
Delft University of Technology |
the Netherlands                |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: any opinions expressed above are my own.