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

  • @[email protected]
    7•3 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]
      8•3 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]English
        1•3 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]
          2•3 months ago

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

          Some places I’ve worked…