> Academic Survey on Discriminatory Language in Software
What do you think of the terms used in software like:
* Blacklist / Whitelist
* "master" / "slave"
* Light mode / Dark mode
*
dummy* "Sanity check"
* _etc..._
π€
> Academic Survey on Discriminatory Language in Software
What do you think of the terms used in software like:
* Blacklist / Whitelist
* "master" / "slave"
* Light mode / Dark mode
*
* "Sanity check"
* _etc..._
π€
> Academic Survey on Discriminatory Language in Software
What do you think of the terms used in software like:
* Blacklist / Whitelist
* "master" / "slave"
* Light mode / Dark mode
*
dummy* "Sanity check"
* _etc..._
π€
> The whole idea of discriminatory language used in software is absurd. The fact society at large has become so super sensitive around the words used to accurately describe things of a technical nature is insane. Take for example MySQL. It has a "master" and a set of "slaves" in most replicated clusters. Does this have any meaning whatsoever to human slavery in general? Absolutely fucking not!
> The whole idea of discriminatory language used in software is absurd. The fact society at large has become so super sensitive around the words used to accurately describe things of a technical nature is insane. Take for example MySQL. It has a "master" and a set of "slaves" in most replicated clusters. Does this have any meaning whatsoever to human slavery in general? Absolutely fucking not!
> Another example; Git (the tool) and Git repositories (where code is organised, and persisted). In the not-so-distant past Github would happily have "master" branches as the default, to my knowledge this is still the default behaviour in
git (the tool) itself. But for whatever reason Github (now Microsoft) has decided that using the term "master" is discriminatory?! To whom? How?! This again is insane. The term "master" here is synonymous to "main", "source of truth" and has little to nothing to do with any other concept.
git (the tool) itself. But for whatever reason Github (now Microsoft) has decided that using the term "master" is discriminatory?! To whom? How?! This again is insane. The term "master" here is synonymous to "main", "source of truth" and has little to nothing to do with any other concept.
> Another example; Git (the tool) and Git repositories (where code is organised, and persisted). In the not-so-distant past Github would happily have "master" branches as the default, to my knowledge this is still the default behaviour in
git (the tool) itself. But for whatever reason Github (now Microsoft) has decided that using the term "master" is discriminatory?! To whom? How?! This again is insane. The term "master" here is synonymous to "main", "source of truth" and has little to nothing to do with any other concept.