It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    243 months ago

    But POC are not the only ones that have been enslaved.

    Pretty much all races and people have been enslaved in history.

    Slave does not equal North American POC slave and the term in this context has absolutely nothing to do with them. The only time it refers specifically to them is when discussing North American history (and maybe current history due to the fact that USA still enslaves people in prison)

    One might argue that the term is outdated because slaves are less common these days, but it has nothing to do with POC (or human slaves at all). But I won’t argue that because the term is very easy to understand and thus not outdated.

    • VulKendov
      link
      fedilink
      20
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      North American, more specifically US slavery is very recent relative to the rest of history and was deeply ingrained into the economy of half the United States. War broke out to abolish it and the effects of it are still felt today.

      Pretty much all races and people have been enslaved in history.

      Don’t deflect from the racism, discrimination, and prejudice that black Americans still experience to this day because of slavery.

        • @ILikeAllAss
          link
          7
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          The origin of the terms have nothing to do with it, and they historically apply to a broad range of races and peoples, but I guarantee when the average person hears “master/slave” their first thought is likely “American south” and not “IDE Drive configuration” or “hydraulic system”, so unless I’ve misinterpreted you by mistake, I’m not sure how you could seriously claim “the terms master and slave have nothing to do with [the historical systemic dehumanization of PoC]”

          I understand it’s more syllables to say “primary/secondary”, but you can also use:

          • Active/Standby

          • Parent/Child

          • Main/Secondary

          • Initiator/Target

          • and far more

          Changing our habits is annoying and takes effort, but I dont know why people are so enthusiastic to hang onto a term that refers to a historically dehumanizing relationship that people are still unwillingly subjected to in the modern day.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            73 months ago

            I guarantee when the average person hears “master/slave”

            This seems like projection… How do you even begin to have this much certainty about what goes on in any head beside your own?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              83 months ago

              I also think it’s weird to hear the word slave in this context (or in the automotive industry where it is also used) and immediately think of black people. What does that say about you and your thought process?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                13 months ago

                I think its weird to even use such a term in a different context to begin with. Its also generally pretty inaccurate. Many such primary/secondary or parent/child relationships in tech exist either for redundancy or for determining priority/sort order, which isn’t what a master/slave relationship would do in a slavery scenerio. About the closest equivalent is a manager/worker relationship, which again is more accurate to say manager/worker because it is not a hostile relationship between the worker nodes and the manager node.

                So in short:

                1. Master/slave is inaccurate. Inaccurate terminology leads to confusion, and confusion leads to inefficiency and time waste.
                2. Changing from Master/slave to something else is a relatively easy change to make
                3. If there’s even a chance that it leads to a more inclusive working environment that’s even better!
                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  23 months ago

                  because it is not a hostile relationship between the worker nodes and the manager node.

                  Some places I’ve worked…

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              13 months ago

              we should get rid of killing processes, and especially killing child processes. Because those are arguably worse.

              As a parent I have zero qualms about the term “killing child processes” also there’s far more actions involved in parent/child relationships in tech than just killing processes.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          63 months ago

          Why not both? We have the capacity to replace outdated/useless words and make the situation better for others. In fact, one does not prevent the other whatsoever

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      13 months ago

      That’s a cool story, bro.

      Completely irrelevant to the observation that descendents of slaves probably dont appreciate the terminology.