'Master' and 'slave': Tech terms face scrutiny amid anti-racism efforts

[tom66]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

[Simon]

i see, I think his law applies to places of debate that are not that open minded.

[xrunner]

After just Googling "Master Slave System" and seeing all the images of Master Slave systems out there, I deem the total elimination of these terms to be, effectively, an impossible task.

[Simon]

After just Googling "Master Slave System" and seeing all the images of Master Slave systems out there, I deem the total elimination of these terms to be, effectively, an impossible task.

Engineers realize this but try to tell the loony lefties.

[GeorgeOfTheJungle]

Code: [Select]

root@xu4-buster:/home/pi/linux# find . -type f -name *.c -exec cat {} + | grep master | wc -l
22238
root@xu4-buster:/home/pi/linux# find . -type f -name *.h -exec cat {} + | grep master | wc -l
2186
root@xu4-buster:/home/pi/linux# find . -type f -name *.c -exec cat {} + | grep slave | wc -l
16168
root@xu4-buster:/home/pi/linux# find . -type f -name *.h -exec cat {} + | grep slave | wc -l
1627
root@xu4-buster:/home/pi/linux#
There are more masters than slaves.

https://www.cnx-software.com/2020/07/03/new-tech-vocabulary-for-2020-could-break-software-compatibility/

[nuclearcat]

Now BlackHat turn.
https://twitter.com/DaveKSecure/status/1279194355585085440
and this guy works at Google...

[Simon]

Now BlackHat turn.
https://twitter.com/DaveKSecure/status/1279194355585085440
and this guy works at Google...

That's a relief, if nutjobs want to "de-platform" themselves great!

[GeorgeOfTheJungle]

Now BlackHat turn.
https://twitter.com/DaveKSecure/status/1279194355585085440
and this guy works at Google...

BlackHat: I wonder what kind of dumb it takes to confuse a hat with a person?

[Nominal Animal]

The truly sad thing here is that all this crap is creating divisions where there used to be none.

Do you know anyone who is against fairness – that everyone should have the same opportunities?
Other than intersectional feminists and those pushing group politics (with the idea that "positive discrimination is not really discrimination"), I don't.

We all want to make the world a better place, but these anti-rationalists are fucking it all up: we're seriously sliding back towards tribalism and class-based society.

I know quite a few people who would love to physically damage or possibly even kill me for my opinions, but all I want is for these people is for them to realize what their actions and demands lead to – nowhere good – so we can actually do what is necessary to make this world a better place, together.

(Right now, I don't see any way to avoid this ideology: all efforts to do better will be fucked up sooner or later by these ideological automatons. They're even "sanitizing" and "fixing terminology" in the Linux kernel!)

So why the fuck are we, people like Dave, or myself (completely different, but both just wanting to help others, although not always successfully on my part), having to continuously defend ourselves, when aggressive violent authoritarians demands are taken at imagined face value, and the factual and measurable damage they are doing utterly ignored?

This is a frigging clown world.

[tggzzz]

s/Black/Afro American/g

[ x ] Sorted.

That will cause all sorts of problems. Use s/Black/Afro_American/g instead.

[james_s]

The truly sad thing here is that all this crap is creating divisions where there used to be none.

Do you know anyone who is against fairness – that everyone should have the same opportunities?
Other than intersectional feminists and those pushing group politics (with the idea that "positive discrimination is not really discrimination"), I don't.

We all want to make the world a better place, but these anti-rationalists are fucking it all up: we're seriously sliding back towards tribalism and class-based society.

I know quite a few people who would love to physically damage or possibly even kill me for my opinions, but all I want is for these people is for them to realize what their actions and demands lead to – nowhere good – so we can actually do what is necessary to make this world a better place, together.

(Right now, I don't see any way to avoid this ideology: all efforts to do better will be fucked up sooner or later by these ideological automatons. They're even "sanitizing" and "fixing terminology" in the Linux kernel!)

So why the fuck are we, people like Dave, or myself (completely different, but both just wanting to help others, although not always successfully on my part), having to continuously defend ourselves, when aggressive violent authoritarians demands are taken at imagined face value, and the factual and measurable damage they are doing utterly ignored?

This is a frigging clown world.

The internet has done as promised and given a voice to marginalized groups. Unfortunately nut jobs, conspiracy theorists, hate groups, racists, anti-vaxxers, and numerous other extremists and fringes are included in those marginalized groups.

[Simon]

Yes, this is what i keep saying to people. Anyone no matter how whacho can put stuff online and if they are determined enough make a good enough looking site that people will believe you can't stop them.

[DimitriP]

The truly sad thing here is that all this crap is creating divisions where there used to be none.

It's not so much about dividing as it is about getting "similar minded individuals" to come closer, get glued together with a stronger bond than before.

Think of a magnetized rod.
If all you have is a bunch of aluminum shavings neither pole gets any joy. Neither one can attact any of these aluminum particles.
Figure out a way to convert them to something like iron especially when they are in the vicinity of your favorite pole , they'll stick to it never leave. It will take a pretty large force to free them up and get attracted by the other pole.
So you have to divide and bias the groups.
...and it's working...

[nuno]

Holy shit! Time to fork Android too?

Now BlackHat turn.
https://twitter.com/DaveKSecure/status/1279194355585085440
and this guy works at Google...

[madires]

Now BlackHat turn.
https://twitter.com/DaveKSecure/status/1279194355585085440
and this guy works at Google...

BlackHat: I wonder what kind of dumb it takes to confuse a hat with a person?

I have no idea! Since they also want to ban the terms blacklist and whitelist I'd assume they are going after white hats and grey hats too. Again, they aren't understanding their own native language, i.e. words can have multiple meanings based on the context. Another sad thing is that they ignore the origin of words. The 'black' in blacklist and black hat comes from black being the darkest color symbolizing night and bad things. Remember the superstition of seeing a black cat? That meaning of black goes back to the early days, long before black slaves were imported into America. Does banning specific words fix racism? No, it doesn't because words aren't racist but some humans are.

[SilverSolder]

Photoshop has the words "Black" and "White" all over the place,  even extremely prejudicial phrases like "100% White" and "100% Black"!     And there is "Red", which discriminates against certain political persuasions or perhaps North American Indians.   Then there is the over-use of "Yellow", which surely must be offensive to Asian people, or people with low levels of courage.

Is Adobe aware of the need to drop this patriarchal cultural legacy that is harming so many??

[TimFox]

Maybe we should adopt mnemonic euphemisms for the spectral colors, starting with "Roy" for red.

[PlainName]

Now BlackHat turn.
https://twitter.com/DaveKSecure/status/1279194355585085440
and this guy works at Google...

BlackHat: I wonder what kind of dumb it takes to confuse a hat with a person?

I have no idea! Since they also want to ban the terms blacklist and whitelist I'd assume they are going after white hats and grey hats too. Again, they aren't understanding their own native language, i.e. words can have multiple meanings based on the context. Another sad thing is that they ignore the origin of words. The 'black' in blacklist and black hat comes from black being the darkest color symbolizing night and bad things. Remember the superstition of seeing a black cat? That meaning of black goes back to the early days, long before black slaves were imported into America. Does banning specific words fix racism? No, it doesn't because words aren't racist but some humans are.

if you (all) read his tweets you'd see that he is fully aware that 'blackhat/list/whatever' has nothing to do with a person per se, and words have different meanings depending on context. The context he is concerned with is simply where there is a negative connotation: black implies bad.

He then goes on to associate that badness with a person: because a person is labelled 'black' he (or she, to be PC) acquires the negative context. I think that's a pretty good example of how racism works, so he kind of shoots himself in both feet there. However, don't make the mistake of trying to make him look a fool for made-up stuff (like 'confusing a hat with a person' and 'going after greylist') because that risks people stopping listening to you.

[Simon]

again it's context and if words are used in a different context they can become offensive or rather be used offensively. Just because a knife can cause serious injury or death does not stop us using these "deadly tools" for non deadly purposes.

[Kjelt]

if you (all) read his tweets you'd see that he is fully aware that 'blackhat/list/whatever' has nothing to do with a person per se, and words have different meanings depending on context. The context he is concerned with is simply where there is a negative connotation: black implies bad.

He then goes on to associate that badness with a person: because a person is labelled 'black' he (or she, to be PC) acquires the negative context. I think that's a pretty good example of how racism works, so he kind of shoots himself in both feet there. However, don't make the mistake of trying to make him look a fool for made-up stuff (like 'confusing a hat with a person' and 'going after greylist') because that risks people stopping listening to you.

Then the solution is simple don't use the word black for describing afro american people which can be taken as racial itself and it is solved.

[maginnovision]

Most of the black people I know would say they're black, or american. Not afro american, not african american. Probably because none I know came from africa.

[Simon]

changing words does not change meaning nor does it reduce the ability to take offence where non was given.

[Kjelt]

Most of the black people I know would say they're black, or american. Not afro american, not african american. Probably because none I know came from africa.

I agree but by naming the color of someones skin you already categorize them and set the pavement for racism.
Example in our country the news media always mention what group the purpotrator is from, so if a maroccan person attacked someone, they say dutch from maroccan heritage or even when they are polite and politically correct they call him an immigrant with non western heritage. Why should you mention from what group someone is? Or color skin? Can't they justvsay a person was attacked by another person?
So using these kind of words add unnecessary information that only triggers certain people into "you see another of those marroccans, they are all criminals" which is totally racist. Stop labelling people.

[langwadt]

Most of the black people I know would say they're black, or american. Not afro american, not african american. Probably because none I know came from africa.

I agree but by naming the color of someones skin you already categorize them and set the pavement for racism.
Example in our country the news media always mention what group the purpotrator is from, so if a maroccan person attacked someone, they say dutch from maroccan heritage or even when they are polite and politically correct they call him an immigrant with non western heritage. Why should you mention from what group someone is? Or color skin? Can't they justvsay a person was attacked by another person?
So using these kind of words add unnecessary information that only triggers certain people into "you see another of those marroccans, they are all criminals" which is totally racist. Stop labelling people.

https://youtu.be/RSi9nEbvexE

[PlainName]

by naming the color of someones skin you already categorize them and set the pavement for racism

There are two issues you're conflating there. One is what to call a person's colour, and the other is when it's appropriate to mention that.

The first has been decided by people of colour (I think that's the currently preferred term; don't shoot me if I'm a month or so behind the times). The actual word isn't important because if you don't use one you'll have to use another. You can't not notice a person's skin colour, and pretending it doesn't exist is promoting the mindset that it's a forbidden thing, exactly the opposite of what you intend. Ideally, you should be able to notice the colour, race, whatever and think nothing more of it.

The second is tricky, but a good test is if you'd use some other innocuous description instead or as well. Would say 'fat bloke'? Or 'fair-haired girl'? If so, then 'black' shouldn't be a problem either, and if it is then it's because you're making it a problem.

As to whether any description is appropriate, technically it probably isn't. You could argue that 'a person argued with another person' is already more than you need to know, but if some noun adds relevant information then why not use it? In the case of an immigrant breaking the law then it probably is relevant that they are an immigrant.