Hacker News Reader

Or you need to look up the definition of "etymology".

Etymology is not the same as the dictionary definition of a word. Nor is its historical use in the far past.

People would be surprised for example to learn that the lemma for "literally" in the dictionary also contains this definition:

"in effect": virtually (will literally turn the world upside down to combat cruelty or injustice — Norman Cousins)

(From Merriam-Webster)

Do you know the meaning? Because both definitions are 400 years old and appeared around the same time:

http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mea...

> dec·i·mate

> ˈdesəˌmāt/

> verb

> verb: decimate; 3rd person present: decimates; past tense: decimated; past participle: > decimated; gerund or present participle: decimating

> 1.

> kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage or part of.

...

Yes, the root of the word is "1 in 10". However, that is not the modern meaning of the word.

this is the worst type of pedantry. Wrong or right, you're being obnoxious.

and brings nothing to the debate but distraction. Who cares if it was 1/10th or 6/10ths, the point remains the same. In fact if anything the headline understates the point by using decimate.