6 ms·

I wonder if the 'Master'/'Slave' terminology is necessary here? Aside from being problematic, does it really describe the setup more than 'Primary'/'Secondary'?

jml7c5 8y ago
Is it problematic outside of the US? That said, possibly not the most immediately illustrative choice of terms; master/slave usually implies who's in charge, not a spatial relationship.
- CharlesW 8y ago
  Slavery/human trafficking is not a US-only thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_21st_century
- vanderZwan 8y ago
  > master/slave usually implies who's in charge, not a spatial relationship. Spatial relationship aside, there are plenty of less problematic ways to depict who is in charge.
openbasic 8y ago
Why is that problematic?
- jml7c5 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)#Terminology_concerns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)#Term...
- tomp 8y ago
  Because people cannot separate the abstract concept of slavery to the actual historical happening. Personally, I want to be a master to my mechanical slaves (tools, dishwashers, computers, robots) and can't wait for a future where machine-slavery is so pervasive that no humans need to work anymore.
  - Dirlewanger 8y ago
    Yup, it's censorship for the sake of censorship. We've had zero problems with master/slave terminology for decades because everyone dealing with it was cognizant enough to realize we weren't talking about human bondage. Then people who are incapable of compartmentalizing word connotations came in and declared their use "problematic" and demand everyone conform to their worldview and to waste time changing code comments, lest you want to be called racist/sexist/fascist/anti-Semite/Trump supporter/etc (mind you, all over words). At the end of the day, nothing changes except the vocal minority's frivolous complaining temporarily ceases. Now watch me be angrily downvoted for no other reason than someone got upset and offended.
    - minikites 8y ago
      There was a similar discussion a while back and I can't find the exact comment, but the commenter I'm paraphrasing posed this example: What if database rows marked for deletion were marked with a "Jew" flag and to process the deleted rows you ran a "holocaust' function? Would you be able to compartmentalize those words? Would you insist that people shouldn't be offended? If you think these situations are different, why?
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - tomp 8y ago
        It's bad to "exterminate" Jews but not bad to exterminate termites (well, at least in the human value system). The "final solution" to the Jewish question is bad, but the final solution to an exam math problem is good. Same words can mean different things in different contexts. "Master" means someone who rules, gives orders, has people working for him. "Slave" is someone or something that follows master's orders without capacity to resist or deviate from that order (well, that's the idea... we'll see how AI turns out).
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - 8y ago
crazygringo 8y ago
Agreed. It's unfortunate but understandable we still use this terminology for existing technologies... but we absolutely should not be propagating it to new ones. Embarrassing story time: I was working in Brazil on a database, and used the Portuguese translations for "master" and "slave" in a technical meeting (I speak Portuguese). The whole room looked at me in shock, and my manager politely corrected me: "um, we just use the English terms 'master' and 'slave'... if you translate them, it's pretty racist."
- triangleman 8y ago
  My wife is Brazilian and I showed her this comment. She says the Brazilians were just giving you a hard time and that they don't find those terms offensive.
m1sta_ 8y ago
This is "retarded" all over again. Slavery in humans is bad. Slavery in software applications it not.
- taylorfinley 8y ago
  At a family dinner I once jokingly described my gluten-free girlfriend as "glutarded," which was our inside joke way to refer to her dietary restrictions. I forgot that my aunt's husband, who has some congenital language issues that leave him with a speech impediment, had grown up being bullied and called 'retard,' until he gasped when he heard my words. I felt horrible, and have since been more conscious with my words. I share this story here because I think it points to a similar issue--the tech world is often a homogenous environment without much representation for African Americans. Can you imagine walking into a classroom full of African American students and casually throwing around the phrase "master and slave" without evoking discomfort in that audience? If we continue to use this language comfortably it implies to me that we aren't inviting to the table the community for whom slavery is still very much an open wound.
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    You seem to be under the impression that black people imported to America were history's only slaves. Good luck finding a country with people of any color that hasn't experienced some level of slavery.
    - paulgb 8y ago
      No part of taylorfinley's argument implies or requires that the American/African slave trade was the only ever instance of slavery.
  - m1sta_ 8y ago
    The focus should be on building environments where those pasts can be discussed and the sounds healed. I can absolutely imagine correctly using the terms master and slave in an environment where some of the people have a darker skin tone than I have. Correct use of words is important if those words have been misused in the past.
dtf 8y ago
The problem in this case, is that it's the terminology used by the standard: https://www.bsi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/BSI/Publications/TechGuidelines/TR03137/BSI-TR-03137_Part2.html https://www.bsi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/BSI/Publicat...
evan_ 8y ago
it doesn't really even describe the relationship accurately- the "slave" symbols aren't doing anything for the "master" symbols, they aren't being delegated to or controlled by the "master" symbols. "Beacon" and "frame" would describe them better, or even "lord" and "serf" if you really need there to be a power dynamic

jml7c5 8y ago

Is it problematic outside of the US? That said, possibly not the most immediately illustrative choice of terms; master/slave usually implies who's in charge, not a spatial relationship.

CharlesW 8y ago
Slavery/human trafficking is not a US-only thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_21st_century
vanderZwan 8y ago
> master/slave usually implies who's in charge, not a spatial relationship. Spatial relationship aside, there are plenty of less problematic ways to depict who is in charge.

openbasic 8y ago

Why is that problematic?

jml7c5 8y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)#Terminology_concerns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)#Term...
tomp 8y ago
Because people cannot separate the abstract concept of slavery to the actual historical happening. Personally, I want to be a master to my mechanical slaves (tools, dishwashers, computers, robots) and can't wait for a future where machine-slavery is so pervasive that no humans need to work anymore.
- Dirlewanger 8y ago
  Yup, it's censorship for the sake of censorship. We've had zero problems with master/slave terminology for decades because everyone dealing with it was cognizant enough to realize we weren't talking about human bondage. Then people who are incapable of compartmentalizing word connotations came in and declared their use "problematic" and demand everyone conform to their worldview and to waste time changing code comments, lest you want to be called racist/sexist/fascist/anti-Semite/Trump supporter/etc (mind you, all over words). At the end of the day, nothing changes except the vocal minority's frivolous complaining temporarily ceases. Now watch me be angrily downvoted for no other reason than someone got upset and offended.
  - minikites 8y ago
    There was a similar discussion a while back and I can't find the exact comment, but the commenter I'm paraphrasing posed this example: What if database rows marked for deletion were marked with a "Jew" flag and to process the deleted rows you ran a "holocaust' function? Would you be able to compartmentalize those words? Would you insist that people shouldn't be offended? If you think these situations are different, why?
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - tomp 8y ago
      It's bad to "exterminate" Jews but not bad to exterminate termites (well, at least in the human value system). The "final solution" to the Jewish question is bad, but the final solution to an exam math problem is good. Same words can mean different things in different contexts. "Master" means someone who rules, gives orders, has people working for him. "Slave" is someone or something that follows master's orders without capacity to resist or deviate from that order (well, that's the idea... we'll see how AI turns out).
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - 8y ago

crazygringo 8y ago

Agreed. It's unfortunate but understandable we still use this terminology for existing technologies... but we absolutely should not be propagating it to new ones. Embarrassing story time: I was working in Brazil on a database, and used the Portuguese translations for "master" and "slave" in a technical meeting (I speak Portuguese). The whole room looked at me in shock, and my manager politely corrected me: "um, we just use the English terms 'master' and 'slave'... if you translate them, it's pretty racist."

triangleman 8y ago
My wife is Brazilian and I showed her this comment. She says the Brazilians were just giving you a hard time and that they don't find those terms offensive.

m1sta_ 8y ago

This is "retarded" all over again. Slavery in humans is bad. Slavery in software applications it not.

taylorfinley 8y ago
At a family dinner I once jokingly described my gluten-free girlfriend as "glutarded," which was our inside joke way to refer to her dietary restrictions. I forgot that my aunt's husband, who has some congenital language issues that leave him with a speech impediment, had grown up being bullied and called 'retard,' until he gasped when he heard my words. I felt horrible, and have since been more conscious with my words. I share this story here because I think it points to a similar issue--the tech world is often a homogenous environment without much representation for African Americans. Can you imagine walking into a classroom full of African American students and casually throwing around the phrase "master and slave" without evoking discomfort in that audience? If we continue to use this language comfortably it implies to me that we aren't inviting to the table the community for whom slavery is still very much an open wound.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  You seem to be under the impression that black people imported to America were history's only slaves. Good luck finding a country with people of any color that hasn't experienced some level of slavery.
  - paulgb 8y ago
    No part of taylorfinley's argument implies or requires that the American/African slave trade was the only ever instance of slavery.
- m1sta_ 8y ago
  The focus should be on building environments where those pasts can be discussed and the sounds healed. I can absolutely imagine correctly using the terms master and slave in an environment where some of the people have a darker skin tone than I have. Correct use of words is important if those words have been misused in the past.

dtf 8y ago

The problem in this case, is that it's the terminology used by the standard: https://www.bsi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/BSI/Publications/TechGuidelines/TR03137/BSI-TR-03137_Part2.html https://www.bsi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/BSI/Publicat...

evan_ 8y ago

it doesn't really even describe the relationship accurately- the "slave" symbols aren't doing anything for the "master" symbols, they aren't being delegated to or controlled by the "master" symbols. "Beacon" and "frame" would describe them better, or even "lord" and "serf" if you really need there to be a power dynamic