[SambalOelek]

In all honesty, it doesn't matter how you feel about it. I do feel strongly about it, and I'm Native Mexican, and I have very strong feelings about my ancestors being enslaved. I was taught these words in the context of colonialism and slavery.

I'm assuming you weren't.

Edit: Glad to see the true nature of your culture. I probably won't come back.

[seneca]

> In all honesty, it doesn't matter how you feel about it. I do feel strongly about it

So you feeling strongly about it means that you get to decide another person, who has been a member of this community much longer than you, no longer gets a say? Ideas like this are infinitely more damaging than any technical terminology could ever be.

[josteink]

This is the core of identity politics, and why it must be rejected outright anywhere it is promoted.

It’s toxic to any reasonable and rational discourse.

[throw0101a]

> […] I'm Native Mexican, and I have very strong feelings about my ancestors being enslaved. I was taught these words in the context of colonialism and slavery.

My ancestors were / are from Eastern Europe, i.e., Slavs. The etymology of which is where the word slave actually comes from.

Do I get a say?

* https://www.etymonline.com/word/slave

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#Terminology

[nabla9]

It was proper to call you ancestors slaves and their owners master.

In the same way it's proper to use same concept as a metaphor to describe other relationships where one thing is owned by other. There is nothing wrong or offensive in the concept of slavery. Even when the context is enslaving humans.

Slavery is immoral, but the concept of slavery is not.

[dragonwriter]

> In the same way it's proper to use same concept as a metaphor

Use as a metaphor depends on similar perception of the resonant features of the literal use since it relies on those carrying over to the nonliteral use; it is eminently clear that within our society there is not a common share perception of those salient features, so it is not a particularly good metaphor outside of narrow homogenous subcultures, and what it is a good metaphor for within each of those subcultures will be wildly different.

Metaphor is inherently highly culture-dependent.

[nabla9]

Slavery as a concept is very clear across cultures in a way that makes good metaphor.

Slave is actor without autonomy. Master is controlling and owning the slave.

[smsx]

By this logic, you think that something has to actually occur first before one can be morally opposed to it? I would have to first witness a genocide before I can have moral opposition to it?

Of course concepts can have moral weight. To suggest otherwise is foolish.

[nabla9]

Using concept has no moral weight.

Using word slave in a sentence is not a connected to morality of slavery.

[terrytate9080]

You do realize every culture and race on planet earth has owned slaves right? It isn’t an exclusively American thing.

[Hamuko]

Have they?

[apcragg]

Exactly, all the more reason to move on from using that language. I'm glad you get it.

[fennecfoxen]

I'm happy to move on from the word "slave". I'm more attached to using the term "master", a useful term associated with various and sundry forms of authority and responsibility, whether that be the master of ceremonies (e.g. MC Hammer), the quartermaster in the Army, or simply "mastery of your craft".

[DonHopkins]

Or a Masterclass in Culture and Diversity.

https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/education/professional-lea...

[apcragg]

In this case, the relationship of "master" and "slave" is intrinsically linked. No one is telling you to stop using "master" in other contexts. It is the master-slave relationship here that is the issue. You are beating down a strawman that wants to remove the term master in all contexts.

[nemetroid]

In the context of this thread it might be a strawman, but there clearly exists an initiative to remove usage of the word master, even when not paired with ”slave”. One such example is the use of ”master” in Git contexts.

[josteink]

> In this case, the relationship of "master" and "slave" is intrinsically linked.

Absolutely not.

The only link between them are as words written in your post.

[blub]

Many people from Europe were enslaved for example by the Ottoman empire. We moved on by being strong and not letting ourselves be defined by this dark episode in our history.

Demanding that certain words are banned is not moving on, it's being perpetually stuck in a victim's mentality.

[Cantbekhan]

Don't forget the Romans, the Mongols and the Greek... they enslaved plenty of uncooperative Europeans. It's just older history.

[terrytate9080]

Clearly you are missing the point. The context of the language in the Kernel has nothing to do with race or slavery.

Where do we stop? I’m assuming next we want to remove the words entirely from the dictionary?

Because we wouldn’t want to prevent anyone reading the dictionary would we?

If removing those words from the dictionary helps even one person more read it, then that’s a win.

[nemetroid]

You lost me. The word ”slave” has nothing to do with slavery? It might not have to do with slavery in the US, but it very clearly refers to slavery.

[drusepth]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homograph

[ppseafield]

That doesn't mean what you think it means. To use an example from the link:

> sow (verb) – to plant seed

> sow (noun) – female pig

Not only are these words pronounced differently, etymologically they have different roots. [0] Do you have any source that would demonstrate that the technical term 'slave' here has nothing to do with the historical enslavement of people?

[0] https://www.etymonline.com/word/sow#etymonline_v_23936

[nkrisc]

I think we all agree slavery of people is bad, but I think it's ok if a computer process is a slave. Computer processes don't have feelings.

[dannypgh]

This is not about the feelings of processes. It's about the feeling of engineers who have to work in this environment. Names are arbitrary; why not pick a better name that isn't tied to scars in our society that have not healed, and wrongs in our wealth distribution that have not been corrected by reparations?

[nkrisc]

But if we excised every word linked to some horrible thing people did from names of things, we'd have no words left to use to describe things.

Look, I get it. I can't tell you how many times people are discussing a problem and describe their "final solution" and I cringe a little inside. But I don't say anything, and I don't ask them to change their language because those are the correct words to use, they just have an unfortunate association. But of course the people saying it are not thinking that at all, nor do I suspect they even know the connection most of the time.

Cleansing nomenclature is a fool's errand and won't actually address the real issues we face today.

[concordDance]

Indeed, think of the poor right wing engineers who feel the ever tightening noose as they walk on eggshells as the tech industry gets more anti-right.

There are tons of rightwingers in tech or wanting to get in to tech who are feeling excluded and unsafe due to the modern political environment, way more than there are potential black/minority software engineers put off by use of terms like "blacklist".

[cabraca]

master/slave just describes a type of relationship between two entities. there is nothing to feel strongly about. the context is what matters. using master/slave in a technical context is not immoral. using it to describe the relationship between people is.

[bsaul]

it's not even immoral to describe human relationship this way if that's actually what's happening between the given humans.

We've became offended by words, without context. It's just crazy... Master and slave , black and white. are becoming curse words.

[dvfjsdhgfv]

This. People got so confused they started fighting with words. What's interesting is that the reverse is happening. These words were completly innocuous, especially in this context. Now whenever I see a "blackilist" I think about black people and how this would offend them. Before I say something, I think a bit if I don't pronounce any word that might be assigned a negative value by someone. I speak less often.

What is even more ridiculous is that it's an American thing. English speakers in other parts of the world look in amazement what is happening and how it's going to end.

[bsaul]

i sincerely hope this remain an american thing, but given the cultural influence the US has over the rest of the world, i wouldn't be so confident.

Which is why people should absolutely make a stand whenever they can to not let this craziness reach the rest of the world.

[SambalOelek]

Let's say you are training a black intern. Do you think you could, with a straight face, explain the nuances of a master-slave relationship in the Linux ecocsystem?

On some level, you must know these words have meaning.

[cabraca]

On some level, you must know that meanings change based on the context a word is used in.

The sentence "i love you" changes its meaning based on the context. you can say it to your mom, your partner, your friend or even complete strangers after they helped you. every time the meaning changes.

[Hamuko]

>Do you think you could, with a straight face, explain the nuances of a master-slave relationship in the Linux ecocsystem?

Yes? Master/slave in computers is not the same as slavery in the real life, which is why we can actually do things like switch a server from a master to a slave and vice versa.

[acdha]

Think about how that sounds from the perspective of someone learning this: “we don’t actually use this term following the dictionary definition, we just like keeping it instead of using more accurate words”

What do we lose by switching to precise terms which don’t require everyone to internalize an overloaded meaning in multiple contexts?

[loco5niner]

The color of the person I'm explaining this to has no relevance.

Unrelated: Do you think black people are the only people who have suffered in slavery?

[pinkfoot]

Done it a few times down here in Africa. Was never a problem.

Presumably you'll now update your position based on my personal anecdote? [Or is that not how it works]

[yakshaving_jgt]

Why do you say "black intern"? Why the obsession with black people? Do you understand that slavery is a global problem that has both been perpetrated by and victimised people of all races?

I'm Polish. My great-grandfather died in a Nazi concentration camp, as a slave. Would you care to be offended on my behalf too? Or will you tell me that I am no longer allowed to use words with multiple meanings in case I might offend myself?

[dvfjsdhgfv]

> Let's say you are training a black intern. Do you think you could, with a straight face, explain the nuances of a master-slave relationship in the Linux ecocsystem?

It would never, ever cross my mind there is any relationship between my colleague being black and the terminology used in the system. Moreover, I think it would be racist to even suggest so.

[loco5niner]

> In all honesty, it doesn't matter how you feel about it. I do feel strongly about it

So, you are the only one allowed to have feelings about this?

[loceng]

So it's impossible for you to create a new context where those words mean something different?

[quonn]

> it doesn't matter how you feel about it

So his opinion does not matter? Only yours does?

I was not only taught these words in the context of colonialism, because that‘s not only where they belong. Societies based on slavery were common in the ancient world, including Greece.

All of this changing of vocabulary is not going to help anyone. But it will happen regardless, I‘m okay with watching this phenomenon play out over the next 30 years or so. Eventually society will figure out that this has done nothing to fix social injustices.

[MilnerRoute]

So his opinion does not matter? Only yours does?

There's an asymmetry here. Whether we recognize it or not, we're in a world where one side has all the institutionalized power, the extra advantages baked into the system. The way I've heard it expressed is "The ultimate privilege is not realizing you have a privilege." I know it can be an uncomfortable topic, but it's been said that that's what perpetuates the system: all the sincere denials, the honest statements of "I just don't see it. I've never experienced it, and I've never really seen it happening myself..."

It ends up inadvertently invalidating anyone who attempts to challenge in even simple ways a few of the basic baked-in issues.

I'm not sure how this conversation could've played out in a way that was better. But I do think there's a dynamic at work here that makes it not as simple as it seems...

[quonn]

Just because „it‘s said“ does not make it correct. I can‘t speak about the situation in the US. But I will speak about the situation in contemporary Germany. I completely reject all of this. Anyone who claims racism is baked into a (european) system should name those injustices (and not omit any corrective measures, for example built into the education and tax systems). Given that, any connection to languages (renaming stuff) should be proven as well. Just invoking some handwavy mistakes in the past is not sufficient. Invoking problems in the US is not sufficient. And even when those problems exist, this, by itself, is not a good reason to accept an arbitrary cause not supported by an argument.

The claim that there is „one side“ with all the advantages is a distraction as well. There are many imbalances and injustices. They are not between two sides. Things that come to my mind are, for example:

* Was your family rich?

* Was your family educated?

* Gender

* Skin color

* Family ties in the place you live

* Accents/Habitus

* Social strata

* Political power

This is a very basic listing. All of this may or may not have an influence. The fact that the current debate is more shallow than even that says a lot.

[neatze]

It not even about animals like dogs, cats, ..., chickens that are enslaved by humans in exactly same way as people where and in some places are, it is not even about human trafficking or education. Only imagine if all this companies that backed a change would setup/double a fund to promote minority kids STEM education and/or legal support fund for police abuse, instead we get slave is offensive word.

[_-david-_]

I assume you are also against killing a process right? My ancestors have been killed before so I should be able to decide whether we use the word kill.

[jasonwatkinspdx]

Absurd.

Tech has a very clear problem with continued sexism and racism. That's why the terminology we use matters. There's no equivalent dynamic around the history of the word "kill."

[loceng]

How's it absurd? It's the same logic. He's offended but the difference is he's not claiming a specific race. Kill, master-slave etc. in a technical context aren't associated with race, yet now that someone's claiming the word "kill" is offensive you have a double standard and are dismissive, like you were in replies to me, that their logical assertion is absurd.

[Hamuko]

>Tech has a very clear problem with continued sexism and racism.

>There's no equivalent dynamic around the history of the word "kill."

I thought that the recent US protests were exactly because there's a racial dynamic when it comes to killings?

[marvin]

Maybe it's relevant to point out that white Americans perpetrating slavery against Africans is by far not the only instance of slavery in world history. So in the light of this, it's a little silly to be terribly afraid of the terms "master" and "slave" due to presumed racial bias.

For example, Mediterranean people were for a long time regularly kidnapped by Arab raiders from the south. Vikings kidnapped people from the British isles. Etc.

[josteink]

> Tech has a very clear problem with continued sexism and racism.

A bold claim without anything to back it up.

I can do that too, but it doesn’t make it fact.

[loco5niner]

No more absurd than the comment they were replying to.

[_-david-_]

There were white racists who killed blacks.

[underyx]

It helps to picture that there's a spectrum of offensiveness of words. The n-word, even if it somehow arbitrarily and innocently showed up in a project, perhaps as an unfortunate acronym, is at the far end of the spectrum. "Kill", for one, is lower by comparison, I think this claim has no burden of proof.

These debates can be broken down into two smaller, more focused ones:

1) Where does a specific word, e.g. "master", or "kill", exist on this linear spectrum of offensiveness?

2) What should be the cut-off point where we actively work towards replacing terminology?

As for question number one, I feel like I'm in no position to join the conversation, as I'm not part of an oppressed class. The only thing I can do is defer to the judgement of those who feel harmed, and I have no ground for arguing with this understanding of theirs.

As for the second question, I'm inclined to set the bar fairly low. This is because the cost associated with replacing terminology is miniscule in the long run. In fact, I believe an order of magnitude more human effort has been spent on debating terminology updates, than spent on adapting to updates that have happened, such as the one in Python documentation.

[zug_zug]

Just to flesh this out a little, suppose my work has 5 Christians, and they all feel "abort" is an insensitive term?

1. Whose opinions count on the issue? Just Christians? All women?

2. Do we take them any less seriously if the motivation seems vaguely political?

I really do understand setting the bar low when everybody is arguing in good-faith. But on anything political, I think it's pretty much a stalemate and we have to recognize there's almost no overlap.

[dannypgh]

These hypothetical scenarios don't "flesh anything out a little," they distract from the real world in front of us.

It's very obnoxious when as a real world person with a real world request, I hear "but what about [insert hypothetical here that isn't actually happening]?" and there's an easy answer: "if that arises, let's deal with it then."

I am descended in part from African slaves. I work in tech. I have dealt with, because of my racial characteristics, a variety of micro and not-so-micro aggressions from my coworkers and that's on top of the bullshit I've had to deal with from neighbors and society. All of this causes me to consider walking away to find something where I don't have to deal with as much BS, and that also makes me sure that the diversity issues in tech are not just a pipeline issue, it's an issue of this work environment not being welcoming to people with different backgrounds. All of these issues are additive - few people want to enter a pipeline for hostile working environment in the end, and those that did have to endure constant bullshit in order to be retained.

Efforts to use more inclusive language aren't going to fix nearly any of the big problems, but it is very, very nice to see /any/ effort here, given the history of none at all. Seeing the effort makes these space more bearable, and in my estimation that justifies the very, very minimal cost of committing to trying to use inclusive language going forward (as a software engineer I'm not keen on renames for renames sake, but we're not talking about renames anywhere - we're talking about preferring inclusive names for new things). Likewise it's disheartening to see how many white folks want to proclaim that there are no diversity and inclusion issues in tech.

[zug_zug]

I get that.

I'd be quite content to concede renaming master/slave in the linux kernel if that was the end of it. I think what I want to fight against most is the amount of distraction/canceling/fear involved in ever-changing semantic rules. The reason people like me get very hesitant to concede any ground is for fear it would empower even more fear of job security at work (over constantly changing correctness rules).

So you can understand where I'm coming from:

- I worry that this is a slippery slope, and if some places do it, then all places will feel pressure to do it, and be called out on twitter if they don't, and create a huge amount of distraction from actually building good products for the customer

- I worry that this is a slippery slope, and that more words might be included (class, caste, abort, kill, black, white, race, male port, female port, dongle)

- I worry that this is a slippery slope, and that these words in other contexts won't be allowed (mastery, pop culture Britney Spear's Slave4U song, BDSM, Master's ranks in videogames)

(I've seen this in my own lifetime with the word "retard," which used to be the most correct medical term for certain mental deficiencies, and due to a constantly shifting correctness window is now basically worse than "Fuck.")

Now traditionally "slippery slope" is sometimes considered a philosophical fallacy. But perhaps you can say, if the momentum kept going would you be against it? Because if that train didn't stop, I think all the consequences I listed would be much too high a price to pay.

[dannypgh]

I don't view any of this through the lens of changing our language for language sake. I view it through the lens of trying to rectify the injustices of slavery and legalized discrimination, and the inequality that permeates our society as a result.

So if we gain momentum here, I see the next step as seeking other forms of reparations, not going after other words.

If there are others who are suffering who want to advocate for ways to improve our language to reduce the unintended harm it has, they're of course welcome to.

Also c'mon this slippery slope argument sounds like this to me: "Where does it stop? Will people object to every word and I'll be forced to express myself just through grunts? What if they then come for my grunts? Therefore I should continue to call things whatever I want because slippery slope."

Where does it stop? It stops when people stop pushing.

[extra88]

> I hear "but what about [insert hypothetical here that isn't actually happening]?" and there's an easy answer: "if that arises, let's deal with it then."

Can't we devise a general set of principles on which we can base decisions to remove words and metaphors from our professions and culture? "Let's deal with it then" sounds like it leads more to reflexive responses to loud voices (for or against) instead of thoughtful, collective, consideration. If principles can be agreed upon in the abstract, without the emotional baggage of specific words for any side, they can be applied and even if one don't like a specific outcome, one can recognize that it's fair.

I'm totally on board with discarding the "master/slave" metaphors in tech, they bring up unwelcome reminders of something much more serious an terrible, especially for people because of the ancestry and/or because of feelings about their role within modern systems.

I have more of a problem with removal of the word "master" on its own; "master" has many different meanings and uses unrelated to American slavery or other systems of oppression.

My biggest problem is with claiming removing "blacklist/whitelist" is an act against systemic racism. "Blacklist" is not a racial term and "whitelist" was only an obvious choice for the opposite of "blacklist" when one was needed. Black and white dualism [0], associating black with bad and white with good, long predates any use of those terms towards groups of people and continues to do so today. It's unfortunate that these particular words are so overloaded; it would be better if "white" and "black" were no longer used to refer to people but there's little interest in that and I know of no good alternatives.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-and-white_dualism

[concordDance]

> I have dealt with, because of my racial characteristics, a variety of micro and not-so-micro aggressions from my coworkers and that's on top of the bullshit I've had to deal with from neighbors and society.

Have you considered whether you might just be sensitive and these micro-aggressions might just be the normal give and take of working in an office environment? With nothing racial about them?

> All of this causes me to consider walking away to find something where I don't have to deal with as much BS

I would be very surprised if you find a less racist job than in the tech industry. Big tech caters way more for minorities than most of the other industries.

[eesmith]

I don't think we should consider weak hypotheticals like yours when we have real-world examples of issues related to "master/slave", including at least one civil rights complaint against the use of the terminology.

This topic has appeared many times on HN. At https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23763739 I quote and link to several earlier real-world examples.

I think those examples show that the spectrum is NOT "offensiveness of words". I see it as one of workplace hostility, quite in line with existing civil rights laws, and within a reasonable existing legal framework. As such, I don't think your #1 or #2 have much bearing at all.

Here's a real-world event from May 2003, at https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/masterslave/ :

> a black employee of the county’s Probation Department filed a discrimination complaint with the Office of Affirmative Action Compliance after spotting “master” and “slave” labels on a videotape machine, whereupon the Internal Services Department was obligated to issue notification requesting that vendors refrain from using the master/slave terminology.

To answer your #1, as an affirmative action topic, the opinion which counts is the relevant court which judges violations of civil rights laws or, in the L.A. case, the opinion of the administrative department overseeing civil rights enforcement.

Your hypothetical isn't structured as an affirmative action issue. Presumably the 5 people feel its insensitive because they are against abortion. In the US, most Christians, most women, and most men support abortion rights, so it's tough to see how being a Christian or woman is at all relevant as the protected class.

It's certainly possible to refine your hypothetical, but I still don't see how it would ever fit under civil rights laws anywhere near as well as "master/slave" does.

FWIW, if you are working for a small evangelical Christian anti-abortion organization, and you use "abort" as the name of the method to cancel a meeting, then yes, you should change it. There are better names for the metaphor you are trying to describe, and generally the only answer to "whose opinions count" is "the ones who can fire you", or more broadly, negatively affect your job.

Their opinions in turn are often based on sales and PR. If it makes sense to their customers to continue using terminology evocative of white supremacy, colonialism, and tragic horror, then go ahead. If it makes sense to their customers to continue using terminology evocative of women's rights, then go ahead. If no one cares, then they won't do anything.

There's been over a decade of raising awareness of issues with "master/slave" terminology, and many people now care. That hasn't existed with "abort". Given the number of groups actively removing the "master/slave" term, I don't see how you can call it a "stalemate" - the abolitionists are winning yet again. And rightly so.

[SambalOelek]

Interesting point. I don't think the word "abort" evokes the entire loss of a culture due to systematic genocide of ancestors, but that's just me.

[Dylan16807]

You could try to word that in a less flippantly biased way.

Slavery doesn't imply genocide, and a whole lot of people would argue that abortion is worse than loss of culture.

[_-david-_]

I have seen some estimates that say there would over 35% more blacks in the US if they wasn't abortion. Maybe genocide isn't the correct word but the effects are the same.

[neilp1]

How many more black people would there be if there wasn’t poverty and discrimination?

[dpau]

good answer. (edit: i wasn't being facetious, i agreed with your comment.) and for anyone complaining about "wasting time" on this issue of terminology, i'd point them to the millions of hours lost due to tabs vs. spaces debates. it's not a waste of time, you just don't recognize it as important. defer to those who do.

[pbhjpbhj]

Probably the same answer fits: if tabs (or spaces) is a problem for you then set your software environment to convert to your preference and convert back to the established use in the project.

Just use what's customary and get on with your life. If it's hurting you to see it then get therapy, you've lost proper perspective.

[underyx]

I do recognize this debate as important. My intention was more to provide a comparison point as to how much it costs to update terminology, to support my stance of setting the bar for a justified update low.

[luckylion]

> it's not a waste of time, you just don't recognize it as important. defer to those who do.

In other words: if anyone says that something is to be renamed, do as they say. If you think it's nonsense or a waste of time, you're just not recognizing it as important, and they are.

[terrytate9080]

“SambalOelek 9 minutes ago [–]

In all honesty, it doesn't matter how you feel about it. I do feel strongly about it, and I'm Native Mexican, “

So let me get this right. Your Mexican views count but his white views don’t matter? Ok..

How about don’t discount someone’s view just because they are or aren’t a certain skin color.

[SambalOelek]

I said nothing about skin color. I said my ancestors were enslaved.

[_-david-_]

Whose ancestors haven't been enslaved?

[quonn]

My ancestors were probably farmers oppressed by some kings. Your point?

[loco5niner]

Mine certainly were too.

[luckylion]

> it doesn't matter how you feel about it. I do feel strongly about it

I think that's pretty much the gist of everything these days.

[SambalOelek]

Comments deleted due to brigading

[zug_zug]

>> You don't get to feel ...

I don't think you get to tell other people what they get to feel.

I encourage working on your empathy here. Who gets to decide "what's polite"? What if people disagree? Who gets to decide whose opinion counts?

[wonder_er]

I am sorry that the "blind to institutional racism" crowd jumped on this so hard.

I'm with you, 100%.

Most white people think the slavery/genocide of america's past is just that - it's in the past. So, when they hear people pushing on verbiage associated with it today, they think "oh, that person is dredging up ancient history, why don't they get over it?"

I (and many others) would argue the legacy of that genocide and slavery is _alive and well_ and shapes our lives today, daily. [0][1]

If one could reasonably complain about master/slave language in the south in the 1850s, they're reasonable to complain about that language today.

Anyway, I think this work of getting rid of language rooted in violence and white supremacy is _very_ worth doing. It's just renaming branches, no one is asking someone to do anything more than press buttons on their keyboard.

Certainly, not everyone has to, but I hope some companies do this work, they're thoughtful and intentional about their language, and then they deliver better products and services by virtue of having healthier culture than their competition, and grow wealthy. Wealthier than the companies who think this work is not worth doing.

I'd never force someone else to rename branches, but I've renamed all of my branches I can control!

I emailed Github Support to see if I could get away from using `master` on Github Pages on my personal site, and they said they are working on it, but this isn't available yet.

Even this comment feels risky. It's attached to my name. I'm honestly a little intimidated to leave it, but it feels like a cop-out if I set up an anonymous account to say "I agree!"

[0] https://www.sceneonradio.org/seeing-white/

[1] https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/behind-the-police/id15...

[bsaul]

You are opening the gates to hell, and don't even realize it.

The same is happening pretty much everywhere in society, where everything becomes contextual and should be adapted to the personal sensitivities of individuals. Which is fine for everything that's fashionable.

But code isn't (just) litterature or art or fashion. The first and foremost concern of code is to convey a precise meaning so that reader (and compilers) understand it correctly.

How do you know it is going to stop to slavery ? How about every single people in the world start getting offended by words in code because it may remind them of something painful in their history, or just doesn't suit their culture / religion / whatever ?

Will you have to create different branch of the linux kernel depending on where the code is going to be cloned ? Where is this going ?

PS: i appreciate greatly that you say you wouldn't force anyone to change their wording, and only change it for yourself. I believe that's the right thing to do. But i feel you greatly underestimate the long-term consequences of supporting for "inclusive terminology"

[wonder_er]

> You are opening the gates to hell, and don't even realize it.

That might be true! I suspect and hope that I'm not, but only time will tell.

> i appreciate greatly that you say you wouldn't force anyone to change their wording, and only change it for yourself. I believe that's the right thing to do. But i feel you greatly underestimate the long-term consequences of supporting for "inclusive terminology"

Yeah! As soon as someone says "here's a good thing I'm trying to do AND YOU ALL HAVE TO DO THE SAME OR BE SHAMED" they kinda lose my respect.

I can update branches on my personal stuff with zero consequence in 30 seconds. Easy.

Complicated CircleCI/deploy environments where branch names are hardcoded in a dozen different places, and the app is on fire already, and no one has time, and the manager is trying to hire new developers while keeping the senior devs happy?

I'm not gonna throw shade on them at all.

That all said, I would _love_ to talk about this more, if you're feeling inclined at all. I tried to dig up an email address for you, and couldn't find it. If you'd be willing to swap some emails on the topic, i'd be thrilled! Hit me up at [e-mail]!

[CJefferson]

Do you think, in most of these cases, master/slave is really the most precise terms we can come up with?

[bsaul]

i think a "master slave" architecture has become a very clear pattern in distributed systems, that anyone in the field recognize (as something opposed to a peer to peer for example).

this is precious, because it saves a lot of explanation time and ambiguities.

Once again i wouldn't mind using a different term if it made things even clearer for a given case. But only for this reason, and not for PC.

[ThrowawayR2]

> "Most white people think the slavery/genocide of america's past is just that"

Why do you believe that it's just white people opposing this? (I'm not white.)

Why do you believe it's just American's opposing this? Alternatively, are non-Americans permitted to continue using these terms?

> "I'm honestly a little intimidated to leave it, but it feels like a cop-out if I set up an anonymous account to say "I agree!""

It's so de rigeur these days that you shouldn't feel bad about that. There are bad actors on all sides waiting to pounce on anything that anyone says.

[aerojoe23]

I was in his boat. "Is this really going to matter to anyone?" It is comments like yours that made me realize that it does. I was wrong, he is wrong.

While the policy should happen whether or not he supports it. I think it does matter how he feels though. He should feel that these words shouldn't be used in this context. Because, we're not going to solve non-whites being second class if a white people can't see the pain cause by the use of the terms. There are so many bigger problems that should be easier to see and acknowledge that seem to just be over looked, because we don't see the pain.

I am with you SambalOelek. I may not understand everything you and your ancestors have gone through so forgive me when I'm ignorant and tell me about it. That said I don't want you or random people like you to have to do all the work, so I'm reading. https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/black-lives-matter

[hpcimg]

I’m a black engineer and I don’t think this will help racism one bit.

[dannypgh]

I'm a black engineer who disagrees with you. I appreciate seeing colleagues and peers make an effort, however small, however symbolic, and that helps motivate me to ignore bullshit and continue working in a team and company where i'm a visibly underrepresented historically oppressed minority. That in turn leads to others seeing me and - people have literally told me this, this isn't me guessing the impact of coming to work - feel like this is a place where they too may be able to survive if not thrive.

This change barely moves the needle on Black representation in tech, but I think it does, however little. Improving Black representation in tech /barely/ moves the needle on racism, but I too think it does, however little (these are good jobs and I know it's helped me and my family close some of the racial wealth gap).

[SambalOelek]

Do you think it'll hurt?

[quonn]

Absolutely, it will. The reason for that is that we will loose the support of a (large?) part of society who would otherwise help the cause.

[jasonwatkinspdx]

Yeah, I don't buy that one bit. If someone is all up in arms over some simple term changes like this, you somehow think they'll be an ally and supporter when it comes to more difficult reforms of structural racism?

[quonn]

Yes. There is a lot of (in my opinion justified) resistance against the policing of language. There is no reason to assume those who oppose these changes would also oppose certain meaningful structural changes. (For example, I strongly oppose all of those trends and I think of myself as progressive and I will resist the destruction of reasonable progressive politics in Europe by what I believe to be irrational, aggressive ideas as long as possible.)

And just to be clear: It‘s fine to use primary and replica. There‘s no problem with the decision itself. The problem is the idea that caused this change and the people in this thread who just stop short of calling someone a racist, because he would reject the idea that the terminology was racist in the first place.

edit: I‘ve not seen such fluctuating votes in a long time if ever than in this thread.That shows how divisive this topic is. So I‘ll call it a day. As I said elsewhere, I can wait 30 years or maybe 50 and see how things played out. But one thing is for sure, these ideas (that is: the current approach) will eventually disappear by themselves without leaving even a trace.

[f1refly]

It might mean they support things that might actually help the cause and not just virtue signalling that just annoys everybody and helps noone

[concordDance]

It portrays black people as highly sensitive and easily triggered. I wouldn't want to hire someone highly sensitive (thankfully I know that most black software devs don't care).

So yes, it's harmful.

[SambalOelek]

Thank you for your comments.

My point about "it doesn't matter how you feel" is inspired by comments like "political correctness culture is out of control".

So many times, people are concerned by their personal freedom and not their responsibility to humanity.

Being asked not to use a word is not severely limiting your world. The trauma of limiting your vocabulary is not comparable to the ideas they evoke.

[hpcimg]

So you are now flat out saying you don’t want people to use the word period. This is further than just removing it from the kernel.

This is the future ladies and gentlemen.

Let’s take a look at real racism, and police brutality.

I’d say you are pretty privileged if your biggest worry is people using White list and black list in the Linux kernel.