3 ms·
> Why not change it to something that does not refer to one of the most barbaric, nightmarish relationships between people? Gee, maybe because it also has conn
by Valmar 6y ago
> Why not change it to something that does not refer to one of the most barbaric, nightmarish relationships between people?
Gee, maybe because it also has connotations that have nothing to do with racism or human slavery?
Where does this slippery slope end?
Should we change other terms in computer technology simply because some vastly small minority emotionally fragile busybodies break down at the mere sight of the word "abort" or "kill" or "terminate"?
Master/slave have very well defined meanings in computer terminology ~ and spoiler alert, there are no human or racial connotations in those meanings anywhere.
- britch 6y agoI think I see where you are coming from. I'm not advocating for changing "abort" or "kill" and agree they go too far. I disagree with your point that it has nothing to do with racism or human slavery. The name master/slave indicates one is giving direction and one is following direction. It's not like someone sat there thought the letters m.a.s.t.e.r sounded good and might at well be the name of bit of the system giving order. My concern is not with industry veterans, but with people being introduced to tech or non-techincal people who are brought into technical discussions. Honestly, would your rather explain a bug as "the secondary was not following the instructions from the primary" or "the slave was not following the instructions of the master" to a room full of people unfamiliar with the subject? The master/slave naming scheme is, to me, an especially bad situation. Things like whitelist/blacklist do not have the same urgency in my mind. I appreciate your concern for the slippery slope but think we can address this without falling all the way to the bottom.