4 ms·

This. These changes to remove subconscious bias from our language are necessary. They are microaggressions which the average user doesn't even realize exist- b

This. These changes to remove subconscious bias from our language are necessary. They are microaggressions which the average user doesn't even realize exist- but which do harms to some individuals in our society. This may be a minority group within our society- even a very small fraction of a percent- but removing biases which are perceived as harmful is one way that we as an organization demonstrate that we are being actively inclusive to all, instead of falling back on habits developed to favor, or carrying the embedded biases of, one social or cultural group. I look at it like ADA requirements for language. If you have a curb a wheelchair user can't climb, that's a harm to that individual- and so we require actions, by law, to ensure that wheelchair users are accommodated in our society. 30 years ago the similar complaints were made against ADA ramps, handicap-accessible restrooms, etc.- that they weren't really necessary because the minority who were being hurt by their absence were such a minority, and weren't really the target served population of the organization, etc. That was anti-inclusivity- and so we passed the ADA and support accessibility for all in our organizations- and nobody these days chafes at it at all, for the most part. Removing harms from how organizations execute their business operations is part of inclusivity. It's not cargo culting, it's not engaging in a self-pleasuring but pointless behavior, it's not a meaningless act that carries no value- it's ensuring that our organization does as little harm to folks as possible as we move forward doing business in the world.

honkdaddy 6y ago
>They are microaggressions which the average user doesn't even realize exist- but which do harms to some individuals in our society. Just so I'm understanding this point of view correctly, every time I or any other dev types git checkout master, a micro-aggression is taking place and someone somewhere is indirectly suffering? I just can't take that line of thinking seriously, I'm sorry.
- merouan 6y ago
  Not the parent, but your characterization of the stated perspective reveals quite well that you aren’t taking it seriously! This is a complex issue, so let’s treat it that way. The micro-aggression, as I understand it, is having to ask yourself whether the term ‘master’ _did_ originate from slavery (in the context of git, IIRC it didn’t, but master-slave replication is the stronger example). The context and plan fact is that programming, as a broad culture, to date, _has_ been excluding Black people and others. So it is not hard to imagine some folks desiring to make a symbolic change to make the culture more inclusive.
  - spoiler 6y ago
    I understand your intentions are noble, but we kinda go back to one of the points the author of the post was making: Has anybody bothered to asked black developers if the terminology alienates them, or makes them feel uncomfortable? I don't believe it was the technical terminology that caused unwelcoming conditions, but the people in the industry.
    - merouan 6y ago
      Black people (or developers, for that matter) are not a monolith, obviously. So me providing one example (https://dev.to/afrodevgirl/replacing-master-with-main-in-github-2fjf https://dev.to/afrodevgirl/replacing-master-with-main-in-git...) only goes to show that it is a concern among some in the community. And, of course technical terminology _alone_ is not the issue! Totally agree that there is more to be done. I just find it amusing that there is so much pushback on this particular aspect (the naming of the branch). Clearly it is a concern, and it is on the whole a small thing to change. Larger systemic change is of course more ideal, but sometimes the battle starts at the symbolic level and expands from there.
      - spoiler 6y ago
        So before I answer, I'm aware that there's a bit of "cognitive dissonance" going on in my head about this topic. One one hand I fully agree with you, but on the other it feels like it's deflecting/trivialising the issue and creates a false sense of accomplishment that will delay the necessary change. > I just find it amusing that there is so much pushback on this particular aspect I think push back comes not from attachment to "master" but from the emotions the virtue-signalling crowd causes in people who desire real change. The virtue-signallers are like the kid on a school project who did virtually nothing, and then tried to claimed all the credit once the project was done. It's a bit "hashtag-contribution," but ironically. It awakes a sense of righteousness in people (whether it's misguided or not is another topic) that think this is stupid, useless, and some probably think it's harmful because it pacifies a large group of people with thinking change happened, when it didn't. It's a bit like seeing a broken website, then changing the button colour and calling the website fixed and being done with it. However, it's like you said, people aren't monoliths. Various people have trigger words. Some people get triggered by "moist," someone in another comment mentioned Jews have the right to be offended by the word "concentration" or the word "camp" (yes, even if it's out of context; master in the case of git is also very out of context to slavery). I don't think changing the world for the sake of individuals is possible/scalable, but what we should do is try and accommodate them. I'm all for making people included and accommodating them, to a degree in which it doesn't make me feel uncomfortable in; I want to be given the same courtesy. It feels like Alex from the blog post waited for the world to change, instead of being the change he wants to see. Waiting for the world to change is futile, you can only influence your environment to a degree, and if that doesn't work look for a better one that suits you better. I don't know if Alex did that or not, but it reads as if he was passive until now. I guess better late than never. > Larger systemic change is of course more ideal, but sometimes the battle starts at the symbolic level and expands from there. I fully agree with you on this, which is where my cognitive dissonance kicks in. I guess part of the reason is that, even though I agree symbolic changes are good, I don't feel that this was even symbolic enough. A better symbolic change in my mind would be for Github to announce a paid apprenticeship program for people without a STEM/CS background, and try to also somehow cover more black communities. I don't know how this would be executed[1], or if it even can be executed, so maybe it's not a well thought-out idea. [1]: Maybe engage/market more proactively at schools/communities where the majority of the students/people are black? Edit: This comment describes the issue more eloquently and succinctly than I could! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26492686 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26492686
- spoiler 6y ago
  I think they mean that if a black person types in `git checkout master` they are inflicting microaggression against themselves... I personally think this is mental gymnastics on par with homeopathy[1]. On the other hand, I guess the "habit" thing might hold _some_ credibility, but it's not probably not going to be as effective as they think. They say it roughly takes 40 days to make a habit, so in the most optimistically woke scenario, this person will be hyper aware about the branch name for about 40 days, after that they'll stop noticing it[2]. [1]: I can also never tell if these people are trolling or genuine. [2]: I'm not really an expert on habits, so maybe my analysis makes no sense.
- istjohn 6y ago
  Imagine that your great-great grandparents were enslaved. Your grandparents weren't allowed to go to white schools. Your dad was harrassed by the cops as a young man in the deep south. You worry that your colleagues may think you wouldn't have been seriously considered for this job if you weren't an underrepresented minority. During onboarding you learn "git checkout master". You type those words everyday for six months, never thinking twice. Your confidence has grown over those months and you begin to feel like you belong here. But there's one coworker, Brad, who just doesn't seem to like you. Or maybe that's just his personality. But Brad just never seems to have anything nice to say. His code reviews are abrasive, though they don't rise to the level of bullying. Maybe that's just how he is. This morning Brad picked apart a commit you were particularly proud of. Code you thought was rather clever, he tore into as overcomplicated and premature optimization. Okay, fine maybe he was right, but he didn't have to be rude about it. You feel like maybe Brad just doesn't like you. What did you ever do to him? Is it because you're black? No, you don't have any real evidence for that. "But...maybe?" a small voice whispers in the back of your mind. Unfortunately you can't look to how other black developers are treated by Brad. There aren't any. You get some fresh air to clear your mind before sitting at your desk to make those changes Brad suggested. "git checkout master". Typing those words, you notice for the first time that "master" is a word with other connotations. Really, they had to choose that word? I mean, it would be a silly thing to complain about aloud. Nevertheless, for months, every time you type that word part of you thinks "Really?" It doesn't upset you, exactly, but it reinforces a sense that this workplace is--hostile is too strong of a word--but not welcoming to black people. Maliciously indifferent. The kind of indifference that sees an enormous racial disparity and shrugs. It's called a micro-aggression for a reason. It's a small thing. But small things add up. And it's an easy fix, so why not?
  - readflaggedcomm 6y ago
    Hypothetical offenses do not add up, because they are insubstantial. That is why not.
  - wreath 6y ago
    Micro aggression is not about the size of the action, it's about the scale (on how many people it is applied). I'm not black, but i worked with Brad before. Years later, I realize Brad was largely right, although a bit of a dickhead with an attitude, but I learned not to be emotionally attached to my code and not think everyone has a beef with me. We are teaching people how to be a bunch of cry babies with all this microaggression nonsense and safe spaces. People need to have a thicker skin, not everyone who disagrees with you or doesn't treat you right has something against you, they sure as hell have reasons for it, not an excuse, but reasons. Checkout Ego Is The Enemy, a light/easy read book, but it introduces you to what I'm saying a little deeper.
- cheez0r 6y ago
  We are eliminating gender from our colloquial terms for the same reason. Serviceperson instead of serviceman; mail carrier instead of mailman, police officer instead of policeman. This is the same thing- just eliminating a term which injuries a different minority along a different identity axis.
colpabar 6y ago
The problem I have with this name change, and reasoning like this, is that there is no "slave" component of the master branch convention. There is no reference to slavery. My understanding is that it's taken from the way records are made, by using a "master" copy which is copied. Should that change? Should all uses of the word "master" be changed? Is the main character of the Halo games a microaggression? Metallica's "Master of Puppets"? Is "master bedroom" a microaggression? Like the author said, it just feels like a meaningless gesture so people can feel better about themselves without fixing any real issues.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > The problem I have with this name change, and reasoning like this, is that there is no "slave" component of the master branch convention. There is no reference to slavery. It's apparently an indirect reference, because its taken from the master/slave usage in BitKeeper, even though there is no slave on the git context. In any case, “main” is simply descriptive rather than either a not very apt metaphor or an out-of-context reference to another (also not very descriptive) metaphor, so it's an improvement independently of whether “master” had social problems on top of it's descriptive ones.
  - dreamer_ 6y ago
    It's not an indirect reference. Word "master" in BitKeeper was used for context where word "origin" is used in Git.
  - Cogito 6y ago
    > It's apparently an indirect reference, because its taken from the master/slave usage in BitKeeper, even though there is no slave on the git context The (likely) basis for the belief that BitKeeper use master/slave and git followed them, the GNOME mailing list post[0] that reignited this discussion in 2019, was retracted the next year[1]. I wrote a summary of the history[2] for Git Rev News, the git developers newsletter. In short, the usage didn't come from BitKeeper, and was intended to mean 'master copy'. After the article was published, Aaron Kushner from BitKeeper reached out and gave me some more history on the usage of 'slave repository' in that one particular spot in BitKeeper[3]: it was a presentation for a client that was already using master/slave terminology and so the same terms were used in the presentation. 0: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/msg00066.html https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/... 1: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2020-June/msg00023.html https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2020-June... 2: https://git.github.io/rev_news/2020/07/29/edition-65/ https://git.github.io/rev_news/2020/07/29/edition-65/ 3: https://twitter.com/AndrewArdill/status/1350537333292949505 https://twitter.com/AndrewArdill/status/1350537333292949505
JPKab 6y ago
Your entire theory ascribes a mysticism to language that is not evidence based at all. Changes to language like removing the term master are absurd and performative. You have jumped onto a movement that is operating like a religion. Telltale signs are capitalization of certain words that aren't normally capitalized, and making a big deal about certain interchangeable words. Growing up as an evangelical Christian I was not allowed to say the word lucky and was insisted that I would say blessed instead. The people who were a minority of my church that made a big deal this did so for personal gain in the social hierarchy. You can sit here and moan all day long about stupid theories that came out of disciplines in universities where the practitioners are universally illiterate in statistics. At the end of the day the entire theory is rooted around essays and very very shaky implicit bias science where the test which I have taken several times are not reproducible for a single individual. Depending on the day I take an implicit bias test I am either anti-black or anti-white. Naturally there's no implicit bias test that has other races featured because these all came from US universities who have a myopic view on race driven by politics and title 9. Enjoy your silly religion. The rest of us are going to set about building a better world for everyone while you ride along on the technical progress and its fruits.
- phlakaton 6y ago
  I would not call it mystical, but rather social. The term "master branch" was established by convention, not science. Now a group of people has proposed a different convention that they like better, and it's gained traction. Conventions often change over time, and rarely require science to justify it. Interestingly, this new convention is superior to the old in several ways, including one you might call scientific: it has two less keystrokes! I can only assume Jef Raskin would heartily approve.
  - oji0hub 6y ago
    > Now a group of people has proposed a different convention that they like better, Umm, no, they were pressured into it. That also means the reason they're doing it is pressure, not liking it. > and it's gained traction. It didn't "gain" traction. It was forced on people by various means of pressure.
pmlnr 6y ago
lol. https://wptavern.com/proposal-to-rename-the-master-branch-from-wordpress-owned-git-repositories https://wptavern.com/proposal-to-rename-the-master-branch-fr... `main` is just as bad as `master` but for a part of the world which is not domestic US. Plus... you do know there's this thing called "Masters" degree, right?
- dijit 6y ago
  Relevant section: > As harmless as the word “main” seems in most Western cultures, a comment posted by Mike Schroder (original Japanese text by Takayuki Miyoshi and translation by Shinichi Nishikawa) pointed out that it was problematic in Japanese culture. “In Japan, for example, to put ‘main’ and ‘others’ as different groups has been utilized as an excuse to justify discrimination,” said Miyoshi. “Not caring about suppressing the Ainu people and their culture at all is possible because of the assumption that Yamato folk is the main and others are secondary. I now came to a point to think we should consider that to set one thing as ‘main’ creates marginals that get oppressed.” I didnt know that, though it does not sound as bad? maybe thats my own cultural bias speaking?
- fomine3 6y ago
  I'm Japanese. I read original argument and it looks like not well plausible. Some Japanese tend to classify people and things to main「主要な」 / other「その他」 but it not mean "main" is discriminative word. It's just "main" but sometimes usage is discriminative.
  - pmlnr 6y ago
    > It's just "main" but sometimes usage is discriminative. So... just like "master"?
horsawlarway 6y ago
I'm not entirely sure I can disagree with you more. > Removing harms from how organizations execute their business operations is part of inclusivity. It's not cargo culting, it's not engaging in a self-pleasuring but pointless behavior, it's not a meaningless act that carries no value- it's ensuring that our organization does as little harm to folks as possible as we move forward doing business in the world. Serious question - What harm are you removing here? Let me ask again - Who is being harmed, how is this helping them? Because to me... I see a giant company (MSFT) using political theatre as advertising. Worse, as a developer in one of the areas that's actually fairly racially diverse (South Atlanta) I sure as fuck don't see any of my black co-workers doing anything other than roll their eyes at this. This was a change engineered by white people, to appeal to white people's current sense of morality, so that a large company can continue its practices of fucking minority and non-white folks over, and yet here you are congratulating them on wasting billions of dollars on it.
oji0hub 6y ago
Microaggressions aren't a well defined concept that actually exists.
_-david-_ 6y ago
Can you name a single person the term 'master branch' has hurt? Your subconscious bias of being an oppressor is showing. You are pushing your views onto others. This is what some slave owners tried to do. Maybe you should check your privilege and stop engaging in microaggressions before accusing everybody else of doing the same.
- dang 6y ago
  You can't take HN threads further into flamewar like this, regardless of how wrong another comment is or you feel it is. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here. Edit: it unfortunately looks like your account has been using HN primarily for ideological battle, or is close to it. That's the line at which we ban an account, for reasons explained here: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=primarily%20test%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme.... I don't want to ban you, so please stop doing this.
- 1337shadow 6y ago
  The master branch has caused many civilian casualties. This change is great but not going far enough, the github background color is white which is offensive, it should use a background that all humans of all colors are equally related to. Options are many: fushia, blue, and green. Also, this comment textarea I'm writing on, is mostly a white background with some black for the text, it's offensive to see that the white occupies a much more real estate than black. And don't even get me started on chess, which is racist because white has the advantage over black, but also sexist because you sacrify the queen to save the king.

honkdaddy 6y ago

>They are microaggressions which the average user doesn't even realize exist- but which do harms to some individuals in our society. Just so I'm understanding this point of view correctly, every time I or any other dev types git checkout master, a micro-aggression is taking place and someone somewhere is indirectly suffering? I just can't take that line of thinking seriously, I'm sorry.

merouan 6y ago
Not the parent, but your characterization of the stated perspective reveals quite well that you aren’t taking it seriously! This is a complex issue, so let’s treat it that way. The micro-aggression, as I understand it, is having to ask yourself whether the term ‘master’ _did_ originate from slavery (in the context of git, IIRC it didn’t, but master-slave replication is the stronger example). The context and plan fact is that programming, as a broad culture, to date, _has_ been excluding Black people and others. So it is not hard to imagine some folks desiring to make a symbolic change to make the culture more inclusive.
- spoiler 6y ago
  I understand your intentions are noble, but we kinda go back to one of the points the author of the post was making: Has anybody bothered to asked black developers if the terminology alienates them, or makes them feel uncomfortable? I don't believe it was the technical terminology that caused unwelcoming conditions, but the people in the industry.
  - merouan 6y ago
    Black people (or developers, for that matter) are not a monolith, obviously. So me providing one example (https://dev.to/afrodevgirl/replacing-master-with-main-in-github-2fjf https://dev.to/afrodevgirl/replacing-master-with-main-in-git...) only goes to show that it is a concern among some in the community. And, of course technical terminology _alone_ is not the issue! Totally agree that there is more to be done. I just find it amusing that there is so much pushback on this particular aspect (the naming of the branch). Clearly it is a concern, and it is on the whole a small thing to change. Larger systemic change is of course more ideal, but sometimes the battle starts at the symbolic level and expands from there.
    - spoiler 6y ago
      So before I answer, I'm aware that there's a bit of "cognitive dissonance" going on in my head about this topic. One one hand I fully agree with you, but on the other it feels like it's deflecting/trivialising the issue and creates a false sense of accomplishment that will delay the necessary change. > I just find it amusing that there is so much pushback on this particular aspect I think push back comes not from attachment to "master" but from the emotions the virtue-signalling crowd causes in people who desire real change. The virtue-signallers are like the kid on a school project who did virtually nothing, and then tried to claimed all the credit once the project was done. It's a bit "hashtag-contribution," but ironically. It awakes a sense of righteousness in people (whether it's misguided or not is another topic) that think this is stupid, useless, and some probably think it's harmful because it pacifies a large group of people with thinking change happened, when it didn't. It's a bit like seeing a broken website, then changing the button colour and calling the website fixed and being done with it. However, it's like you said, people aren't monoliths. Various people have trigger words. Some people get triggered by "moist," someone in another comment mentioned Jews have the right to be offended by the word "concentration" or the word "camp" (yes, even if it's out of context; master in the case of git is also very out of context to slavery). I don't think changing the world for the sake of individuals is possible/scalable, but what we should do is try and accommodate them. I'm all for making people included and accommodating them, to a degree in which it doesn't make me feel uncomfortable in; I want to be given the same courtesy. It feels like Alex from the blog post waited for the world to change, instead of being the change he wants to see. Waiting for the world to change is futile, you can only influence your environment to a degree, and if that doesn't work look for a better one that suits you better. I don't know if Alex did that or not, but it reads as if he was passive until now. I guess better late than never. > Larger systemic change is of course more ideal, but sometimes the battle starts at the symbolic level and expands from there. I fully agree with you on this, which is where my cognitive dissonance kicks in. I guess part of the reason is that, even though I agree symbolic changes are good, I don't feel that this was even symbolic enough. A better symbolic change in my mind would be for Github to announce a paid apprenticeship program for people without a STEM/CS background, and try to also somehow cover more black communities. I don't know how this would be executed[1], or if it even can be executed, so maybe it's not a well thought-out idea. [1]: Maybe engage/market more proactively at schools/communities where the majority of the students/people are black? Edit: This comment describes the issue more eloquently and succinctly than I could! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26492686 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26492686
spoiler 6y ago
I think they mean that if a black person types in `git checkout master` they are inflicting microaggression against themselves... I personally think this is mental gymnastics on par with homeopathy[1]. On the other hand, I guess the "habit" thing might hold _some_ credibility, but it's not probably not going to be as effective as they think. They say it roughly takes 40 days to make a habit, so in the most optimistically woke scenario, this person will be hyper aware about the branch name for about 40 days, after that they'll stop noticing it[2]. [1]: I can also never tell if these people are trolling or genuine. [2]: I'm not really an expert on habits, so maybe my analysis makes no sense.
istjohn 6y ago
Imagine that your great-great grandparents were enslaved. Your grandparents weren't allowed to go to white schools. Your dad was harrassed by the cops as a young man in the deep south. You worry that your colleagues may think you wouldn't have been seriously considered for this job if you weren't an underrepresented minority. During onboarding you learn "git checkout master". You type those words everyday for six months, never thinking twice. Your confidence has grown over those months and you begin to feel like you belong here. But there's one coworker, Brad, who just doesn't seem to like you. Or maybe that's just his personality. But Brad just never seems to have anything nice to say. His code reviews are abrasive, though they don't rise to the level of bullying. Maybe that's just how he is. This morning Brad picked apart a commit you were particularly proud of. Code you thought was rather clever, he tore into as overcomplicated and premature optimization. Okay, fine maybe he was right, but he didn't have to be rude about it. You feel like maybe Brad just doesn't like you. What did you ever do to him? Is it because you're black? No, you don't have any real evidence for that. "But...maybe?" a small voice whispers in the back of your mind. Unfortunately you can't look to how other black developers are treated by Brad. There aren't any. You get some fresh air to clear your mind before sitting at your desk to make those changes Brad suggested. "git checkout master". Typing those words, you notice for the first time that "master" is a word with other connotations. Really, they had to choose that word? I mean, it would be a silly thing to complain about aloud. Nevertheless, for months, every time you type that word part of you thinks "Really?" It doesn't upset you, exactly, but it reinforces a sense that this workplace is--hostile is too strong of a word--but not welcoming to black people. Maliciously indifferent. The kind of indifference that sees an enormous racial disparity and shrugs. It's called a micro-aggression for a reason. It's a small thing. But small things add up. And it's an easy fix, so why not?
- readflaggedcomm 6y ago
  Hypothetical offenses do not add up, because they are insubstantial. That is why not.
- wreath 6y ago
  Micro aggression is not about the size of the action, it's about the scale (on how many people it is applied). I'm not black, but i worked with Brad before. Years later, I realize Brad was largely right, although a bit of a dickhead with an attitude, but I learned not to be emotionally attached to my code and not think everyone has a beef with me. We are teaching people how to be a bunch of cry babies with all this microaggression nonsense and safe spaces. People need to have a thicker skin, not everyone who disagrees with you or doesn't treat you right has something against you, they sure as hell have reasons for it, not an excuse, but reasons. Checkout Ego Is The Enemy, a light/easy read book, but it introduces you to what I'm saying a little deeper.
cheez0r 6y ago
We are eliminating gender from our colloquial terms for the same reason. Serviceperson instead of serviceman; mail carrier instead of mailman, police officer instead of policeman. This is the same thing- just eliminating a term which injuries a different minority along a different identity axis.

colpabar 6y ago

The problem I have with this name change, and reasoning like this, is that there is no "slave" component of the master branch convention. There is no reference to slavery. My understanding is that it's taken from the way records are made, by using a "master" copy which is copied. Should that change? Should all uses of the word "master" be changed? Is the main character of the Halo games a microaggression? Metallica's "Master of Puppets"? Is "master bedroom" a microaggression? Like the author said, it just feels like a meaningless gesture so people can feel better about themselves without fixing any real issues.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> The problem I have with this name change, and reasoning like this, is that there is no "slave" component of the master branch convention. There is no reference to slavery. It's apparently an indirect reference, because its taken from the master/slave usage in BitKeeper, even though there is no slave on the git context. In any case, “main” is simply descriptive rather than either a not very apt metaphor or an out-of-context reference to another (also not very descriptive) metaphor, so it's an improvement independently of whether “master” had social problems on top of it's descriptive ones.
- dreamer_ 6y ago
  It's not an indirect reference. Word "master" in BitKeeper was used for context where word "origin" is used in Git.
- Cogito 6y ago
  > It's apparently an indirect reference, because its taken from the master/slave usage in BitKeeper, even though there is no slave on the git context The (likely) basis for the belief that BitKeeper use master/slave and git followed them, the GNOME mailing list post[0] that reignited this discussion in 2019, was retracted the next year[1]. I wrote a summary of the history[2] for Git Rev News, the git developers newsletter. In short, the usage didn't come from BitKeeper, and was intended to mean 'master copy'. After the article was published, Aaron Kushner from BitKeeper reached out and gave me some more history on the usage of 'slave repository' in that one particular spot in BitKeeper[3]: it was a presentation for a client that was already using master/slave terminology and so the same terms were used in the presentation. 0: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/msg00066.html https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/... 1: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2020-June/msg00023.html https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2020-June... 2: https://git.github.io/rev_news/2020/07/29/edition-65/ https://git.github.io/rev_news/2020/07/29/edition-65/ 3: https://twitter.com/AndrewArdill/status/1350537333292949505 https://twitter.com/AndrewArdill/status/1350537333292949505

JPKab 6y ago

Your entire theory ascribes a mysticism to language that is not evidence based at all. Changes to language like removing the term master are absurd and performative. You have jumped onto a movement that is operating like a religion. Telltale signs are capitalization of certain words that aren't normally capitalized, and making a big deal about certain interchangeable words. Growing up as an evangelical Christian I was not allowed to say the word lucky and was insisted that I would say blessed instead. The people who were a minority of my church that made a big deal this did so for personal gain in the social hierarchy. You can sit here and moan all day long about stupid theories that came out of disciplines in universities where the practitioners are universally illiterate in statistics. At the end of the day the entire theory is rooted around essays and very very shaky implicit bias science where the test which I have taken several times are not reproducible for a single individual. Depending on the day I take an implicit bias test I am either anti-black or anti-white. Naturally there's no implicit bias test that has other races featured because these all came from US universities who have a myopic view on race driven by politics and title 9. Enjoy your silly religion. The rest of us are going to set about building a better world for everyone while you ride along on the technical progress and its fruits.

phlakaton 6y ago
I would not call it mystical, but rather social. The term "master branch" was established by convention, not science. Now a group of people has proposed a different convention that they like better, and it's gained traction. Conventions often change over time, and rarely require science to justify it. Interestingly, this new convention is superior to the old in several ways, including one you might call scientific: it has two less keystrokes! I can only assume Jef Raskin would heartily approve.
- oji0hub 6y ago
  > Now a group of people has proposed a different convention that they like better, Umm, no, they were pressured into it. That also means the reason they're doing it is pressure, not liking it. > and it's gained traction. It didn't "gain" traction. It was forced on people by various means of pressure.

pmlnr 6y ago

lol. https://wptavern.com/proposal-to-rename-the-master-branch-from-wordpress-owned-git-repositories https://wptavern.com/proposal-to-rename-the-master-branch-fr... `main` is just as bad as `master` but for a part of the world which is not domestic US. Plus... you do know there's this thing called "Masters" degree, right?

dijit 6y ago
Relevant section: > As harmless as the word “main” seems in most Western cultures, a comment posted by Mike Schroder (original Japanese text by Takayuki Miyoshi and translation by Shinichi Nishikawa) pointed out that it was problematic in Japanese culture. “In Japan, for example, to put ‘main’ and ‘others’ as different groups has been utilized as an excuse to justify discrimination,” said Miyoshi. “Not caring about suppressing the Ainu people and their culture at all is possible because of the assumption that Yamato folk is the main and others are secondary. I now came to a point to think we should consider that to set one thing as ‘main’ creates marginals that get oppressed.” I didnt know that, though it does not sound as bad? maybe thats my own cultural bias speaking?
fomine3 6y ago
I'm Japanese. I read original argument and it looks like not well plausible. Some Japanese tend to classify people and things to main「主要な」 / other「その他」 but it not mean "main" is discriminative word. It's just "main" but sometimes usage is discriminative.
- pmlnr 6y ago
  > It's just "main" but sometimes usage is discriminative. So... just like "master"?

horsawlarway 6y ago

I'm not entirely sure I can disagree with you more. > Removing harms from how organizations execute their business operations is part of inclusivity. It's not cargo culting, it's not engaging in a self-pleasuring but pointless behavior, it's not a meaningless act that carries no value- it's ensuring that our organization does as little harm to folks as possible as we move forward doing business in the world. Serious question - What harm are you removing here? Let me ask again - Who is being harmed, how is this helping them? Because to me... I see a giant company (MSFT) using political theatre as advertising. Worse, as a developer in one of the areas that's actually fairly racially diverse (South Atlanta) I sure as fuck don't see any of my black co-workers doing anything other than roll their eyes at this. This was a change engineered by white people, to appeal to white people's current sense of morality, so that a large company can continue its practices of fucking minority and non-white folks over, and yet here you are congratulating them on wasting billions of dollars on it.

oji0hub 6y ago

Microaggressions aren't a well defined concept that actually exists.

_-david-_ 6y ago

Can you name a single person the term 'master branch' has hurt? Your subconscious bias of being an oppressor is showing. You are pushing your views onto others. This is what some slave owners tried to do. Maybe you should check your privilege and stop engaging in microaggressions before accusing everybody else of doing the same.

dang 6y ago
You can't take HN threads further into flamewar like this, regardless of how wrong another comment is or you feel it is. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here. Edit: it unfortunately looks like your account has been using HN primarily for ideological battle, or is close to it. That's the line at which we ban an account, for reasons explained here: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=primarily%20test%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme.... I don't want to ban you, so please stop doing this.
1337shadow 6y ago
The master branch has caused many civilian casualties. This change is great but not going far enough, the github background color is white which is offensive, it should use a background that all humans of all colors are equally related to. Options are many: fushia, blue, and green. Also, this comment textarea I'm writing on, is mostly a white background with some black for the text, it's offensive to see that the white occupies a much more real estate than black. And don't even get me started on chess, which is racist because white has the advantage over black, but also sexist because you sacrify the queen to save the king.