3 ms·
My point wasn't that it's awkward primarily. I agree with you that the whole point of jargon is for 'insiders' to be able to communicate quickly and unambiguous
by mercer 12y ago
My point wasn't that it's awkward primarily. I agree with you that the whole point of jargon is for 'insiders' to be able to communicate quickly and unambiguously.
The point is that it could be sensitive and just isn't a nice term to use day to day. I've had moments myself where using the master and slave terms felt a bit... odd. It very well might be that I was the only one feeling a bit awkward, but that itself is a reason to consider using less loaded terms.
Second, though I agree that industry terms are valuable, I can't think of that many terms that have connotations similar to slavery (but by all means jog my memory!). And even if there are, I don't see why we can't incrementally change our terminology and phase out anachronistic (and/or loaded) ones.
Finally though, I don't find this a big issue. I see it as relatively easy to slowly change this term, and I like that, but I don't feel like I should actively argue for changing the terms 'master' and 'slave'. But I do enjoy discussing it :).
- goblin89 12y agoYou're right—I can't think of any more terms that have connotations of comparable negativity (though quite a few plainly odd-sounding ones). I will blame my indifference to this question on my English non-nativity. :) The only remaining argument against the change is searchability—hopefully Google knows or will learn soon that these are interchangeable terms.
- mercer 12y agoThat's a good point. Google has been doing a decent job at that so far, though, and I suspect if such a change in terminology were ever to become mainstream, it will be a gradual process, and generally specific to 'newer' systems.