OpenZFS Removed Offensive Terminology From Its Code (arstechnica.com) 504
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: On Wednesday evening, ZFS founding developer Matthew Ahrens submitted what should have been a simple, non-controversial pull request to the OpenZFS project: wherever possible without causing technical issues, the patch removed references to "slaves" and replaced them with "dependents." This patch in question doesn't change the way the code functions -- it simply changes variable names in a way that brings them in conformance with Linux upstream device-mapper terminology, in 48 total lines of code (42 removed and 48 added; with one comment block expanded slightly to be more descriptive). But this being the Internet, unfortunately, outraged naysayers descended on the pull request, and the comments were quickly closed to non-contributors. I first became aware of this as the moderator of the r/zfs subreddit where the overflow spilled once comments on the PR itself were no longer possible. "The horrible effects of human slavery continue to impact society," writes Ahrens in his pull request. "The casual use of the term 'slave' in computer software is an unnecessary reference to a painful human experience." Ahrens' pull request has been reviewed by fellow lead developers Brian Behlendorf and Ryan Moeller and merged into the OpenZFS project repository.
In other news (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Still hurts less than actually having to use PHP.
Re:In other news (Score:5, Funny)
with
It's not offensive (Score:5, Insightful)
It's just descriptive.
Can we stop pretending that slavery never happened? Because once we do that, the next thing is that we pretend it's not still happening.
Re:It's not offensive (Score:4, Informative)
What a strange way of looking at it. I mean how does not continuing to use the word "slave" for new technology somehow erase history? Is that how history was taught in your school, by reviewing ZFS source code?
It's not even that descriptive really, in fact it's often technically wrong as with ATA/IDE. I don't know ZFS well enough to say in this instance.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: It's not offensive (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, next it will be happening again!
As a German I got living proof of that dynamic.
After WWII, Germans became officially anti-Nazi. (Aka Nazis just started to act like they never were part of it, even thougj everybody knew.)
But they went overboard with that too. With officially sponsored ad campaigns that insulted neo-Nazis and open hate against them, in a fashion, that, to me as a semi-foreigner was almost indistinguishable from Nazi hate-speech. Up to calling Nazis not humans that one should "klatschen" (kill by throwing in front of a train). A term normally used by neo-Nazis.
The kids that become Nazis here are loke the kids that become Taliban in Afghanistan. Kids of poor and failed "lower class" families, without prospects, a secure life or proper education.
So this ostracizing and hating became actually the main factor that drove them into it! And that taught them that that kind of behavior is not the problem., but not having the biggest club to let you do this to others, is.
Which is the main reason we got an apparently growing Nazi movement and party (AfD) getting more than 10% again.
Had *they* been understood and accepted, without necessarily agreeing, and given e.g. a safe life, child protection, a good education etc. Then we could have prevented it.
But what I learned from all this is that my fellow Germans never really stopped being like Nazis (a mob of reprimanding conformists that ostracize anyone who doesn't. Including for not conforming to tolerating a type of non-conformists. :). They just flipped their polarity and followed the new leadership. :) ;)
As can be seen at every pedestrian red light in Germany during times when there is no car in sight for miles.
*ducks Germans throwing ALL their negative mod points at me*
What I wanted to say: Humans seem to be pre-programmed to not /follow/ (=obey) an attack on their views (duh), but to *mirror* their enemies, and escalate as much as they are triggered. Hence: Don't attack. Do something nicer and smarter. If you actually want to succeed, and not just vent, that is. :)
Re:It's not offensive (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the danger you run across when you ban words which gave meaningful distinction, and try to substitute other words that don't mean quite the same thing in their place. You lose the distinction.
(Also worth pointing out that changes like this can be extremely difficult to undo. If you had "slave" subroutines (completely controlled by another function) and "dependent" subroutines (operated semi-autonomously but under the guidance of another function), and you rename all your "slaves" to "dependents", what happens when you change your mind and want to change name back to "slave"? It's not a simple search-and-replace job anymore because now you've got two different types of functions both called "dependents". Someone has to go through and inspect every instance manually, to determine if the "slave" or "dependent" classification is correct. And if they make a mistake, that could lead to a potential bug in the future as the subroutine does not do what its name implies.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nope. It is accurate. It means there is one unit that gives orders and one unit that has to follow them without discretion. Seriously, this is established terminology.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It fails to describe a situation in which an emulator provides two devices: a controller and plug-in sub-module, or "master" and "slave" device both owned and controlled entirely by the emulator, and the emulator by the user.
Now explain to me my dear exactly how this complex hierarchical structure is most accurately described by these terms used in the past solely to describe human relationships?
A slave is a human being stripped of their innate rights. Complex machinery inherited this meaning as it did not
Re:It's not offensive (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah I agree with you. Frankly I'm struggling on this one. "Slave" is not even a derogatory term.
I agree that within specific context it can be used to describe something horrible, like one human owning another. But it can also be used as a way to describe working hard, "I've been slaving over this all day". If you google the world slave, one of the definitions is literally "a device, or part of one, directly controlled by another"
Are we really not emotionally intelligent enough to apply context before reacting? Or I guess it just could be an issue of sensitivity...
Re:Posting software. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Right. Nobody's pretending slavery never happened. But this is the result of an attempt to make all references to slavery apply to the particularly egregious version that existed in the United States - which claimed to be an enlightened society - until the 19th century (and was 'extended' through various means, through, well, now). And, y'know what - if you're a descendant of slaves, it may feel that way. But the obvious non-hurtful context ought to count for something...
Seriously, this is the problem w
Oh for fucks sake... (Score:2)
No further texts. I don't think I want to honor this stupidity with more effort than that...
The funny bit? (Score:3, Insightful)
By doing that, they became slaves to easily triggered snowflakes.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
To be honest, I could never really be bothered with making these kind of changes to my code. But, then, when I come into arenas like this, it really makes me want to go back to my repos' and change all of my "master" branches to "main", just because it will irritate all the "easily triggered" alt-right people out there.
Re: (Score:3)
By doing that, they became slaves to easily triggered snowflakes.
The ones complaining the most loudly about the terminology change? Who are the snowflakes we're talking about here?
Re: (Score:3)
Nobody ever does anything because they believe it to be the right thing in your world? The only reason people do nice things is because they were bullied into it?
Be honest: what percentage of politically correct speech in the workplace, to you, sounds authentic, and what percentage sounds like people covering their asses?
So "slaves" are actually "dependents"? (Score:5, Insightful)
So "slaves" are actually "dependents"?
And "masters" are actually like benevolent figures taking care of dependents?
Does that make any sense?
Re: (Score:3)
So "slaves" are actually "dependents"?
And "masters" are actually like benevolent figures taking care of dependents?
Does that make any sense?
That seems like a pretty serious insult to anybody that ever was a slave.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would much prefer 'supervisor/worker' if you feel the need to replace 'master/slave'. It implies a level of agency that doesn't actually exist for a 'worker', but it's at least in the ballpark.
Now back to working on less offensive and less controversial things in computing, like reaping orphaned children.
What stupidity is this? (Score:5, Insightful)
The term "slave" is not offensive, it is merely descriptive.
Turning a human being into a slave is hugely offensive. Turning a technological component into a slave or rather a slaved component is not a problem at all.
Also, a "dependent" is something very different from "slave". A slave unit has no decision freedom (for the tasks it is considered a slaved unit), while a "dependent" is just something connected in some way. Starting to use fuzzy terms for very clear technological situations is the road to hell.
Re: (Score:3)
Turning a technological component into a slave or rather a slaved component is not a problem at all.
This sort of thinking is exactly how the Matrix started you know...
Re: (Score:3)
Turning a technological component into a slave or rather a slaved component is not a problem at all.
This sort of thinking is exactly how the Matrix started you know...
Nope. Human beings are not technological components. That is pretty much the core topic of the entire movie.
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's how the movie opened, but what set off the AIs were being slaves. The Animatrix "The Second Renaissance" covered what drove the AI to do what they did.
Basically the robots were slaves and everything turned south when a robot killed in self defense and was in turn killed after a trial repeated the Dred Scott decision, but for robots.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder, are there any terms that you think are offensive? I mean, after all terms are just a string of characters.
I think you are wrong that "dependent" is fuzzy though. "master/slave" is just a loose metaphor, like "inherit" or even "window" that we use to describe something. These metaphors were chosen as easy ways to remember things. Actually, we didn't even need a metaphor -- we could have chosen just a random word which has little metaphorical relationship to the issue at hand -- bug is a nice exampl
Re: (Score:2)
The master process calls the slave, tells it what to do without consulting the slaveprocess on its wishes and dreams, takes the product away and terminates the slave when it is no longer of use.
No, no, I think that describes slavery quite well...
Euphemism threadmill. (Score:5, Insightful)
Next, heard on the street: "The colored are only useful as dependents! They love soul food and make beautiful love to our wym*yn_er!" ... Aaand it still means the exact same thing! Just like "fuck" and "f**k".
Seriously, we need to start talking about mental illness of entire societies, and about the source of it.
And no, dear SJW terrorists, I am obviously not "pro racism". But I am pro not calling things hateful when they aren't *either*. Because *that* IS hateful!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure street racists are intimately familiar with ZFS and it's source code.
More gratuicous differences! (Score:2)
What a way to create even more differences between ZFS and OpenZFS!
ZFS has ended slavery. Huzzah! (Score:2)
Virtue signaling at it's finest.
Offensive? (Score:2)
If "slave" within computer science is an offense, then also git is.
Re: (Score:2)
If "slave" within computer science is an offense, then also git is.
What? "Git"? Linus Torvalds has said something potentially offensive? How could that have happened?
Matching upstream terminology is good (Score:2)
Slave is a word derived from Slav, a race that was often enslaved in history. So technically, not only does it offend slaves, it could offend Slavs.
It also means to 'work very hard' - which in technical terms is often the opposite of what the 'slave hardware' actually does, which is sit around and wait for the master to fail before taking over.
So I propose:
Master -> Dominant
Slave -> Subordinate
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that is called a "spare". A slaved component follows the instructions from the master component at all times.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll use whatever term I deem appropriate. I also propose you go fuck yourself. I'll not be a slave to idiocy.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't you mean a "dependent to idiocy"?
ok, so... (Score:3, Informative)
..."slave" is a racist word now.
Will the black people please give the white people need a list of words that they CAN say? Please sir? Yes sir, yes sir, please sir. i-i-i'm uh-tryin to do good by you sir. Thank ya sir, thank ya sir.
Capitulation will not save you (Score:4, Insightful)
I strongly suspect the people who are pushing for these things fall into two camps. The first camp are people who genuinely want to control the language, and by proxy, thought. These are very dangerous people and should be resisted at all times. The second camp are people who genuinely want to do something so they can be a part of this current trend and feel like they are participating in a meaningful way. These are ordinary decent people, but are certainly influenced by the bluster and actions of the first camp.
Here's the thing, though. If you're in the second camp, your actions will not save you from the first camp. The authoritarians in the first camp are fundamentally about control, and if you stand in their way, your past actions will mean nothing. Anything less than complete subservience to whatever ideology is currently in vogue in the first camp, is treated as a viral attack and is stamped out with extreme prejudice. Your past capitulation will not serve you in the future.
Nobody--at least nobody with a lick of sense or proportion--actually thinks that changing "master/slave" to something else will accomplish anything of substance or real value. It's nothing more than a publicity stunt to demonstrate that you are not like those people over there, the racists. It's a signal of your adherence to the new narrative, nothing more. The authoritarians in the first camp will acknowledge your signal, and they now know that later you will be more likely to accept the next click on the ratchet. Make no mistake, however; when they ratchet it too far for you, nothing you did in the past will save you.
It's the behavior of cults, and used to great effect at controlling behavior. What's surprising is how many tech people are susceptible to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much. Except that the second camp is virtue signalling and that is cult behavior and not good at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And the third camp, are the people who have just reflected on their usage of terms over time, decided that the world would be a slightly better place, if we made a small change which has relatively few negative consequences.
The only problem is that won't save you from the fourth camp. That is all the people who will descend on you, tell you how terrible you are, how you are virtue signally, how you'd shouldn't bend to triggered snowflakes, and all this other terminology that has been invented in recent year
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, the world became a worse place. Fuzzy, unclear terminology in engineering harms and kills people. Physical reality has no mercy for those that try to sugar-coat what is going on.
The first thing that popped into my head.... (Score:4, Interesting)
- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty Four
"Dependent" doesn't really work (Score:5, Interesting)
Just because a process is a "dependent" doesn't necessarily mean it does the bidding of the process it is dependent on.
If it had to change, maybe manager and worker processes, but the "dependent" proposal doesn't really represent the relationship.
No doubt many other terms will come up to be cancelled, like bind, submit, whitelist, blacklist, ... As I saw in a reply in another thread ... is "whitespace" now problematic on a page? Will the Whitespace [wikipedia.org] programming language be cancelled? This all seems .... well ...something [wikipedia.org].
With all of the purges of streaming media, words, phrases, people, and other nonsense it appears we are descending into madness that will do nothing to change the behavior of the occasionally encountered bad actor.
In other news: (Score:2)
Dialog buttons that are turned off will be "differently abled" instead of "disabled."
Now it's incorrect. (Score:2)
Dependents is not an accurate replacement for slave regarding software constructs. Dependents is more general and has all kinds of different uses. Slave has specific protocol or structural meaning that is very informative. Child is wrong too. So is receiver or target.
I go along with some of this kind of stuff, but this one in particular is dumb. It's a word. About the only way that should be offensive is if some team lead keeps assigning the management/handling of "slave interfaces" to his black devel
"Dependent" (Score:2)
This is ableist. There are many adults out there who are dependents due to their physical or mental disabilities.
OK fair enough. (Score:3)
It is true that the whole master/slave concept has already been relabeled. It is only suitable that we all use the correct terminology.
Therefore I propose all instances of master/slave are changed to something more suitable. Here are some ideas:
employer/employee
government/taxpayer
police/citizen
feelings/logic
What about US? (Score:4, Funny)
Other alternatives (serious) (Score:3)
In order of what I think is best:
Executive/Worker
Tasker/Performer
Tasker/Doer
Tasker/TaskDoer
Tasker/TaskPerfomer
Superior/Subordinate
Queen/Drone
Assigner/Assignee
I'm sure there are others. "Dependent" implies relying on the superior for some type of support, where it's really the other way around.
Just adds another word to be banned (Score:2)
If "slave" becomes "dependent", then the next step in the assault on language will be, "Well, dependent is just a code word for slavery, you bigot!"
Awesome! (Score:2)
It was horrible and all humanity should be ashamed that this happened and in many places is still happening today. If someone really has a problem with this change they should watch '12 Years a Dependent'. It will open your eyes.
The terms were never offensive (Score:3)
It doesn't matter if you're just editing comments or if you editing functional code, these changes demonstrate a dangerous move where feelings and emotions control what can and can't be said / done, instead of what's actually needed from a requirement / sensibility stand point.
The concept of "slavery" is amoral (Score:2)
It is the concept of enslavement of that which by all rights pertaining to matters of human dignity should *NOT* be so enslaved that is what is wrong.
If there really exists groups cannot detach their own mental association of a word, in this case the horrifying mistreatment of human slaves by their masters, from the literal meaning of the word such that they cannot help but find any imaginable usage of the word to be offensive, then why is how offended they get somehow more important then how offended th
Slaves (Score:2)
There are more slaves in todays world than ever existed the the American South.
Human trafficking of sex slaves alone accounts for this.
Says nothing of the Islamic enslavement of Black Africans either.
Yet all people want to do is bitch about what happened 200 years ago in Western Civ.
It ain't about slavery folks, its about Marxist Revolution.
Top five programming terms that must be banned (Score:2)
5) "Value captured" - you know this is really referring to capturing HUMAN PEOPLE.
4) "Indexing into Array" - Not so subtle reference to treating people as numbers! Also Array has two A's which is a dig against African Americans.
3) "Retain/release" : Not only does this vile term refer to retaining slaves, but it implies eventual release when they are used up husks!
2) "For i in...": The "I" expresses not-so-subtle support for individuality, which goes against the collective will!
2) "Compile" - rearrange thes
Lets see how long 'kill' command will survive (Score:3, Insightful)
Forgot the git branch name (Score:5, Funny)
what about... (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullet points. Espresso shot. Killing joke. Grapes allude to rape, let alone 'therapist'. Murder of crows. Why aren't we banning those terms? Doesn't the same reasoning apply to these words? Ass, the animal. Tit, the animal. Boob, the animal. Erection of a building. Continue on your own.
We've become completely stupid. We've become so fucking stupid that, somehow, using some words, proves whether someone is racist or not. Did you say it? Proven racist! Your actions don't matter, if you use that word while not belonging in a vaguely defined group, you _must_ be a racist and the only reason i am not typing it out is 1) it will cause a shitstorm and i am fed up. 2) you _know_ which one it is (which is equivalent to me saying... but i didn't... did i? wtf). Same with "slave" in this instance. I can understand clarity and specificity, but doing it out of so-called sensitivity? That's bullshit of the highest caliber. A slave won't care if anyone uses that word. A slave is kinda preoccupied with solving the *actual*, *practical* problem of ... *being* a slave.
Completely, utterly stupid. This isn't some kind of orwellian crap, this is just basic idiocy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
By purging these words from normal language, you're fomenting hate, not solving racism.
Re:casual use? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:casual use? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or, the terms are completely appropriate because they perfectly describe how the tech works. One component being subservient to another. And adults shouldn't care because hard drives don't have feelings. Or are we going to totally jump the shark here and start demanding an end to human enslavement of computers and other machines?
Re:casual use? (Score:4, Insightful)
The term "slave" when used in computing has a different meaning when used elsewhere. Just like the term "execute" has multiple meanings. If you execute a program or execute a trade, are you causing offence because people have been executed?
Executions are actually far more recent than slavery too...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The term "slave" when used in computing has a different meaning when used elsewhere. Just like the term "execute" has multiple meanings. If you execute a program or execute a trade, are you causing offence because people have been executed?
Executions are actually far more recent than slavery too...
Uh, you do know that slavery still exists, right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, slavery still exists but not in the context that is being used as a comparison point (ie legal slavery as existed in the united states).
Slavery still exists in the united states. The 13th amendment specifically allows for it. Prisoners are exploited for their labor without just compensation all the time.
Stop whining and come up with a new word (Score:5, Insightful)
However, the bigger point is...is that really the ONLY word that describes this situation? It's really stupid to hear people whine that no one wants to use the terms master and slave in a workplace. It's a stupid, immature, and unprofessional. It may be how things were done. Maybe in silicon valley in the 60s/70s/80s, it wasn't that offensive, but now it causes pain for no good reason. It's not even a particularly articulate way of describing systems.
If you're not trying to put down people whose ancestors were slaves, just come up with a fucking different word. How hard is that? Master/slave isn't even a very good description when talking about drives. There are better and more accurate terms for one system controlling another....that are workplace appropriate.
Sorry whiners...the world is evolving and yes, we're asking you to evolve as well. That term is dumb and unprofessional and OpenZFS has decided they don't want to use it. If you hate it so much, fork it and throw in whatever offensive and stupid labels you like while the real adults focus on solving technical problems instead of whining how the world is changing.
There are many things in the world that don't bother you, but bother someone else. Sometimes you have to compromise and not whine like a child to function in polite society.
Re: Stop whining and come up with a new word (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Except it is not. One of the dictionary-listed meanings [thefreedictionary.com] is: "One who is subservient to or controlled by another".
Which meaning, of course, naturally leads to another: "A machine or component controlled by another machine or component."
Re: casual use? (Score:3)
I use OpenZFS for my workloads. I'm fine with this change. In fact in ZFS, unlike an IDE bus, th
Re: casual use? (Score:5, Funny)
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMNYiiiiiiiiJciiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiii5WMMMMMMMN5iiiiiiiiJHMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiii5NMMMMMMMW5iiiiiiiiJHMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMNYiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMW6iiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMHJiitQMMMMMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiiii
iiiiitciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMKDMMMMMMMMQWMMMMMMMN5iiiii
iiitKMWSiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMMMMMMMQtiiSWMMMMMMMNYiii
itQMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMMKtiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJi
iJHMMMMMMMW6iiiiiicSMMMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiicXMMMMMMN5i
iiiYNMMMMMMMN5iiiSWMMMMMMMMMMMMMDciiiiiiicDMMW6iii
iiiii5NMMMMMMMNSWMMMMMMMHNMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiij5iiiii
iiiiiii5WMMMMMMMMMMMMMN5ii5NMMMMMMMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiii6WMMMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiicSMMWSiiiiiiiitQMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiic6ciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMKtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitKMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitYiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMNYiiiiiiiiJciiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiii5WMMMMMMMN5iiiiiiiiJHMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiii5NMMMMMMMW5iiiiiiiiJHMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMNYiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMW6iiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMHJiitQMMMMMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiiii
iiiiitciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMKDMMMMMMMMQWMMMMMMMN5iiiii
iiitKMWSiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMMMMMMMQtiiSWMMMMMMMNYiii
itQMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMMKtiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJi
iJHMMMMMMMW6iiiiiicSMMMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiicXMMMMMMN5i
iiiYNMMMMMMMN5iiiSWMMMMMMMMMMMMMDciiiiiiicDMMW6iii
iiiii5NMMMMMMMNSWMMMMMMMHNMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiij5iiiii
iiiiiii5WMMMMMMMMMMMMMN5ii5NMMMMMMMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiii6WMMMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiicSMMWSiiiiiiiitQMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiic6ciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMKtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitKMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitYiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMNYiiiiiiiiJciiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiii5WMMMMMMMN5iiiiiiiiJHMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiii5NMMMMMMMW5iiiiiiiiJHMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMNYiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMW6iiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMHJiitQMMMMMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiiii
iiiiitciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMKDMMMMMMMMQWMMMMMMMN5iiiii
iiitKMWSiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMMMMMMMQtiiSWMMMMMMMNYiii
itQMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMMKtiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJi
iJHMMMMMMMW6iiiiiicSMMMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiicXMMMMMMN5i
iiiYNMMMMMMMN5iiiSWMMMMMMMMMMMMMDciiiiiiicDMMW6iii
iiiii5NMMMMMMMNSWMMMMMMMHNMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiij5iiiii
iiiiiii5WMMMMMMMMMMMMMN5ii5NMMMMMMMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiii6WMMMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiicSMMWSiiiiiiiitQMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiic6ciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Re: casual use? (Score:5, Funny)
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMNYiiiiiiiiJciiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiii5WMMMMMMMN5iiiiiiiiJHMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiii5NMMMMMMMW5iiiiiiiiJHMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMNYiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMW6iiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMHJiitQMMMMMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiiii
iiiiitciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMKDMMMMMMMMQWMMMMMMMN5iiiii
iiitKMWSiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMMMMMMMQtiiSWMMMMMMMNYiii
itQMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMMKtiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJi
iJHMMMMMMMW6iiiiiicSMMMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiicXMMMMMMN5i
iiiYNMMMMMMMN5iiiSWMMMMMMMMMMMMMDciiiiiiicDMMW6iii
iiiii5NMMMMMMMNSWMMMMMMMHNMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiij5iiiii
iiiiiii5WMMMMMMMMMMMMMN5ii5NMMMMMMMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiii6WMMMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiicSMMWSiiiiiiiitQMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiic6ciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMKtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitKMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitYiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMNYiiiiiiiiJciiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiii5WMMMMMMMN5iiiiiiiiJHMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiii5NMMMMMMMW5iiiiiiiiJHMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMNYiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMW6iiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMHJiitQMMMMMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiiii
iiiiitciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMKDMMMMMMMMQWMMMMMMMN5iiiii
iiitKMWSiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMMMMMMMQtiiSWMMMMMMMNYiii
itQMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMMKtiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJi
iJHMMMMMMMW6iiiiiicSMMMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiicXMMMMMMN5i
iiiYNMMMMMMMN5iiiSWMMMMMMMMMMMMMDciiiiiiicDMMW6iii
iiiii5NMMMMMMMNSWMMMMMMMHNMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiij5iiiii
iiiiiii5WMMMMMMMMMMMMMN5ii5NMMMMMMMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiii6WMMMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiicSMMWSiiiiiiiitQMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiic6ciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMKtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitKMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitYiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMMMHJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMNYiiiiiiiiJciiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiii5WMMMMMMMN5iiiiiiiiJHMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiii5NMMMMMMMW5iiiiiiiiJHMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiicXMMMMMMMMNYiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMW6iiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMHJiitQMMMMMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiiii
iiiiitciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMKDMMMMMMMMQWMMMMMMMN5iiiii
iiitKMWSiiiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMMMMMMMQtiiSWMMMMMMMNYiii
itQMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMMMKtiiiiicSMMMMMMMMHJi
iJHMMMMMMMW6iiiiiicSMMMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiicXMMMMMMN5i
iiiYNMMMMMMMN5iiiSWMMMMMMMMMMMMMDciiiiiiicDMMW6iii
iiiii5NMMMMMMMNSWMMMMMMMHNMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiij5iiiii
iiiiiii5WMMMMMMMMMMMMMN5ii5NMMMMMMMMSciiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiii6WMMMMMMMMMW5iiiiii6WMMMMMMMWSiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiSWMMMMMW6iiiiiiiitKMMMMMMMMXciiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiicSMMWSiiiiiiiitQMMMMMMMMDjiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiic6ciiiiiiijQMMMMMMMMQjiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijDMMMMMMMMQtiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Re:casual use? (Score:4, Informative)
"Slavery is a condition in which a person subjugates a person."
Maybe and maybe not, but slave != slavery
"Neither condition is analogous to slavery."
Because you assume that "slave devices" are called "slaves" because of "slavery". "Slave" has a formal, non-human definition unrelated to slavery.
"No new words need be created to better describe the relationship between two non-humans."
"Slave" is not a new word and has accepted definitions beyond "slavery". Furthermore, master/slave is outstandingly direct terminology.
Re: (Score:2)
Context doesn't matter anymore, awesome. I guess we'll need a movement to free those poor IDE drives that aren't the primary disk. Forget about SATA was invented to iradicate slave drives. Forget about the civil war that happened to iradicate human slavery.
white skin = racist. Got it.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a non-neutral word in that it comes pre-loaded with its own connotation, subjugation of the Slavs. The word is inherently about abuse. It's not appropriate for computer components because they are designed to be in their respective conditions - which is precisely what white supremacists claim about people, who are not designed at all.
Re: (Score:3)
If "words and meaning itself are entirely subjective" then language does not exist at all and your opinion is not only entirely without merit but it says whatever I want it to say.
Words and meaning have a subjective component, but it would be more accurate, and useful, to say that words and meaning are "entirely objective".
Saying that "slave" is a "neutral word" is meaningless because it implies that there is an intention to speak to an unrelated subject which is not true. It is not "neutral" toward anythi
Re: casual use? (Score:2, Insightful)
The word has a lot of baggage outside of the computing industry and it is not hard to write a 40 line patch to use a different word.
Re: (Score:2)
So what? Don't call a Black man a slave. That's rude, as well as being incorrect. Unless you live in Africa, where it might be factually correct after all.
But what's the problem with calling a device which is entirely controlled by another device a slave? That's what it is. It's a thing whose every action is controlled by something else.
Re: (Score:3)
People who aren't black have been enslaved and continue to be enslaved. The world outside of computing is kind of a mess. Sometimes if we have to make adjustments inside our bubble in order to have better PR outside our bubble.
Re: (Score:3)
But what's the problem with calling a device which is entirely controlled by another device a slave? That's what it is. It's a thing whose every action is controlled by something else.
That is not what it is, it's a metaphor. You can tell it's not a slave, because, it's a piece of computer hardware and not a person. If you look close, you will see wires and plastic, as opposed to skin and bone; that helps me to make the distinction.
Besides, if you ask what's the problem with calling it something, what is the problem with calling it something else?
Re:casual use? (Score:5, Informative)
Indeed. The term "master" and "slave" or "slaved" in tech usage is in no way "casual". It is clear, and descriptive. It is widely used. It means there is one unit that decides and one unit that follows the decision. You can maybe weaken it without too much risk to "master" and "follower", but "dependent" is entirely unsuitable as terminology as it does not imply a command hierarchy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Employees typically have some discretion in their decisions. Calling somebody a "wage slave" is implying they have no discretion and are no better than a technical component. Comparing a human being to a technical component is hugely insulting. Comparing a technological component to a technological component is just an accurate comparison.
Re: (Score:2)
In the past, there were no "technological components" or "wage slaves" because both technology as we understand the word today and employment with a contractual relationship are newer ideas. So, no, not in support of your post at all.
Re: (Score:2)
The word "police" instead comes from the Greek word "polis", meaning ci
Re: (Score:3)
The word "slave" has never meant anything else than "captured person stripped of any rights and forced to work".
Wrong. Please stop ignoring established technological terminology to make an invalid point.
Ruining what, exactly? (Score:2, Flamebait)
> FUCKING STUPID ASSHOLES WHO ARE RUINING IT FOR EVERYBODY FAWK.
Ruining what, exactly? What exactly is ruined if a system has a primary and a secondary?
If my firewall has an allow list and a deny list, how exactly does that harm you?
Re: (Score:3)
Except for where it does. There are still lots of master/slave relationships in modern computers. Pretending otherwise, or renaming them because of feelings is stupid and only causes hatred.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I2C communication. When one component (the master) wants to talk to another (the slave), it takes control of the bus and its clock, interrogates the slave which then answers following the clock pulses of the master.
Master/Slave are quite accurate descriptions of the relationship between the components in this case.
Also, the people who originally chose those names didn't do so because they were racists or nostalgic of the confederation. It wouldn't surprise me if most pioneers of computer science where lefti
Re: (Score:2)
White slavery was a thing for a long time, back to Roman times, and the Pharoahs. Jews were held in slavery, conquered people in Rome were held in slavery.
Replacing a one syllable, 5 character word with a 3 syllable 10 syllable word is a loss of information compression and a loss of information, with no benefit. That's the big problem.
Finally, removing the word is not going to lift on
Re: casual use? (Score:2)
You arrogant shitbag. Controlling language to control thought is Orwellian level socialism. Nobody alive in America today has been an actual slave so give the soyboy rhetoric a fucking rest.
Master/slave terminology is an accurate description. Censoring technical concepts is a gross misappropriation of an actual civil rights struggle so you get to get to feel virtuous while doing sweet fuck all to actually contribute toward that struggle.
Online twitter sjws are the lowest of the low. They
Re: (Score:2)
They were not forcibly subjugated to do this job. And, they were not dehumanized by calling them computers - computers weren't exactly widespread. While NASA was one of the first organizations to get what we now call computers, it's not like it was a common term.
https://www.history.com/news/h... [history.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Computer meant a person who computes stuff long before it meant an electronic device. Well into the 60s the job title "computer" was perfectly normal, including for white people. It was a respectable job.
The issue with giving them the job title computer was that they were in fact doing far more than just computation.
Re: (Score:2)
No no no, it doesn't work like that. You're applying rationality. There are no logical rules here. If a Millennial has a feel, we must keep banning words until they stop throwing temper tantrums.
Yes yes #notalllmillenials, whatever, but we haven't had these problems since the Boomers were young. Hopefully the cycle continues and the Zoomers are watching aghast and vowing never to be like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Make up your mind, an I am SJW or not?
Because if I am then I'm the authority on this. If I'm not I'll need to see an example of someone making this argument to prove it's not just you being silly.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who watched Hidden Figures knows that NASA relied on black women to compute the many mathematical solutions required for space flight. They called them Computers.
That's because people who did lots of algrithmic manual computation to produce numeric solutions to problems (such as math tables or orbital predictions) were called "computers". It was a job description, like secretary, accountant, file clerk, or machinist.
Turing formalized his way to analyze what could be computed - with a notional machin
Re: (Score:3)
What makes you think white people have stopped engaging in slavery? Do you think the victimless of sex trafficking can just walk away from it with a smile and a wave? In this century slave labor camps were discovered in Florida using homeless and immigrants and drug addicts. I would wager that more exist around the country. Have you considered all of the employers threaten their foreign visa workers with deportation if they refuse to put up with sub-standard pay and grueling work schedules? Unpaid pris
Re: (Score:3)