Hacker News Reader

Comment by maccam912 | Hacker News Reader

I understand "coronavirus" isn't specific, but why not just use that? Nobody this year will be confused what is being talked about. And if another coronavirus comes around, it will end up with a different commonly used name. Hearing "Chinese virus" the first time made me think first of a computer virus, then some brand new virus I wasn't aware of, and then finally realizing it was another term for the coronavirus.

View on HN

> Nobody this year will be confused what is being talked about.

You'd be surprised. My relatives sent me a conspiracy theory video based on the fact that Lysol wipes manufactured in fall 2019 claim they kill "Coronavirus". So obviously the global conspiracy knew of the virus in advance!

Or, better yet, call it COVID-19. Slightly more specific than just coronavirus. Yes, COVID is the disease, not the organism, but for most common uses in everyday speech, that's probably ok.

The fact that it’s not specific enough really is a problem. We can call it COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2, but that kind of precision is inconvenient.

Fair. COVID-19 would also work for me. That's used enough that people know immediately what you're talking about.

COVID-19 is a _disease_ caused by SARS-CoV-2, just as AIDS caused by HIV.

Point is, nobody will be confused when you say COVID-19 or more specifically “COVID-19 virus” where context demands it.

I am starting to see it referred to as "C-19," or "C19."

The best of both worlds would be to come up with a precise, "inconvenient" name, then create an acronym from it.

I can’t tell if you’re joking. Acronyms always overlap with some other meaning causing misunderstanding.

Not joking; An acronym + virus is much better than china + virus, or Covid-19 (which is actually the name of the disease).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com