> A man named Ferrari might not be a blacksmith.
It was right in front of me and I feel dumb, having never considered it might have the same latin root as the word ferrous.
https://www.thoughtco.com/ferrari-last-name-meaning-and-orig...
Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
21–30 of 174 posts
Re: Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
#22The insistence on a surname is quite annoying for people who don't have one or use one. In India, there are many cultures where a surname or family name isn't used or isn't passed down from one generation to another and to the next and so on. There are cultures where a surname is used. But what's very common across the country is addressing people by their first (or only) names whether or not one is close to them. Ev…
Some cultures in South India simply have the place from which they are from as their surname. Most of the south Indians have their father's name as surnames as well
Re: Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
#23The insistence on a surname is quite annoying for people who don't have one or use one. In India, there are many cultures where a surname or family name isn't used or isn't passed down from one generation to another and to the next and so on. There are cultures where a surname is used. But what's very common across the country is addressing people by their first (or only) names whether or not one is close to them. Ev…
I'm working in a product right now where we've run into this and we have a ticket to remove the family name requirements. Even if we remove the family name requirement from our end, a third party we use for identity verification still requires a family name, so how do we deal with that?
Request that they change, and if they won't, then find a new third party I guess?
Re: Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
#24Naming is an interesting thing. I'm wrestling with it from another contex presently. I'm reminded of the lines from Homer. in which the hero (himself given at least two names within the text, including one in its title) unambiguously (and rather rashly as it happens) identifies himself to Polyphemus: Cyclops, if any man of mortal birth Note thine unseemly blindness and inquire The occasion, tell him that Laertes' son…
And I'm reminded of a time in college when my roommate, who majored in classics, came home from class today and told me that they discussed a theory that the Iliad and Odyssey, were not actually written by Homer, but rather by a different place poet who happened to have the same name.
"So they were actually written by Homer then?"
I thought it hilarious, because the only identity of Homer I knew was the guy who wrote those works, so what difference di see it make? Identifiers can get into very sticky business sometimes.
Re: Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Hopefully one day we have a UID for humans[…] that sounds really dangerous
I keep seeing people from US and UK equating IDs with totalitarianism. Why? I don't follow the reasoning here. I believe all Americans have a social security number, right? And all passport holders have a de-facto global UID (but not everyone has a passport and bi-nationals may have several) I don't see what this enables that would be impossible without.
I think there are several reasons:
1. Centralization gives provides a juicy target for misuse/negligence by both legitimate (see: Equifax) and illegitimate (see: Cambridge Analytica). De-centralization allows a preferable level of chaos
1. Historically there has been an attempt at balancing federal (national) vs local (state) powers.
2. The country can probably not even agree on one standard -- some states for examples are very strict while others are not (usually along party lines)
Re: Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
#26The insistence on a surname is quite annoying for people who don't have one or use one. In India, there are many cultures where a surname or family name isn't used or isn't passed down from one generation to another and to the next and so on. There are cultures where a surname is used. But what's very common across the country is addressing people by their first (or only) names whether or not one is close to them. Ev…
In some Western European cultures (Portuguese and Spanish, and thereby Latin American), most people have two last names.
When dealing with automated systems in other countries, it causes all manner of problems!
Re: Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
#27The insistence on a surname is quite annoying for people who don't have one or use one. In India, there are many cultures where a surname or family name isn't used or isn't passed down from one generation to another and to the next and so on. There are cultures where a surname is used. But what's very common across the country is addressing people by their first (or only) names whether or not one is close to them. Ev…
There was a stand up comedian of Algerian descent explaining that situation when the French administration tries to do the census of their colony. The custom was to use your father's and grandfather's name as a name. Problem is, many people, including brothers would have the most popular name (I think it was Mohammed). Having a Mohammed, son of Mohammed, grandson of Mohammed was common. So the French admninistration…
Atatürk (the founder of the Turkish Republic) made surnames mandatory as a reform to be compatible with Europe (he was very pro-Europe) and this was in 1934. Everyone got to pick their own surnames. Luckily people hesitated to pick Mohammed because the word for last name in Turkish translates to "name of lineage" and that'd be a big claim (also I've heard that it wasn't allowed not to put a target on non-muslims' backs). So now we have a significant portion of the population with the surname "Pure/Core Turk" (Öztürk) and its variations (my surname Özcan included). Atatürk (father Turk) was reserved for the president though :)
Re: Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
#28Last names, surnames & nicknames were initial attempts of man to address name collisions.
SMS lingo & keyboards caused this: https://www.abbreviations.com/acronyms/FAMOUSPEOPLE
I hear there are 300 million Hindu gods, someone ought to list them out somewhere for reference.
Re: Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Hopefully one day we have a UID for humans[…] that sounds really dangerous
I keep seeing people from US and UK equating IDs with totalitarianism. Why? I don't follow the reasoning here. I believe all Americans have a social security number, right? And all passport holders have a de-facto global UID (but not everyone has a passport and bi-nationals may have several) I don't see what this enables that would be impossible without.
The UK has no requirement for ID. The old WW2 ID was abolished in the early 50s as an infringement of civil liberties. The idea being that a citizen can go about their lawful business without interruption unless suspected of something. IDs were being asked for by police and others as a matter of course rather than of suspicion.
A passport or driving licence forms a de facto ID, but both of those are voluntary, and there is no requirement to carry them. You don't even need to carry your driving licence when driving. I haven't seen my driving licence for years! I think I know which drawer it's in. :)
There are also voluntary ID schemes for youngsters who want to prove they're old enough to buy alcohol and tobacco, or be in a club etc.
Re: Why we don't use Galileo's last name (2009)
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
I keep seeing people from US and UK equating IDs with totalitarianism. Why? I don't follow the reasoning here. I believe all Americans have a social security number, right? And all passport holders have a de-facto global UID (but not everyone has a passport and bi-nationals may have several) I don't see what this enables that would be impossible without.
I think there are several reasons: 1. Centralization gives provides a juicy target for misuse/negligence by both legitimate (see: Equifax) and illegitimate (see: Cambridge Analytica). De-centralization allows a preferable level of chaos 1. Historically there has been an attempt at balancing federal (national) vs local (state) powers. 2. The country can probably not even agree on one standard -- some states for exampl…
But do any of these address the point that effectively anyone in a developped country already has one or more unique IDs of some kind ?
And for any developping country, time will come where people who don’t have an ID now will need to get one, to receive care, go to school, get out of the country or drive a car.
In that sense, if a country allows people to not have a surname, as long as they have at least one canonical ID I guess it’s fine.