I actually like blocklist/passlist<p>its far more descriptive.<p>Personally I'd like master/apprentice to be more popular.<p><i>but</i> all of this is pointless if we don't actually remove some barriers to entry for IT. I doubt people are put off by the use of master/slave, Its the barrage of abuse one gets for being different[1].<p>[1]no this isn't from most people, but the minority is vocal and toxic, and the majority don't really do enough to keep a lid on the tedious pricks who insist on making IT creepy for anyone who isn't a young bloke.
<rant><p>> <i>blacklist/whitelist</i><p>Thanks for bringing race into something that has absolutely nothing to do with it.<p>As a person of color I also don't see how this is "inclusive" at all, like yeah, the only reason I don't commit to the Linux kernel is because of the presence of words such as master/slave...<p>Maybe I'm wrong but why do we have to shame everyone into changing things when there isn't proof that those things were actually harmful to minorities.<p>But oh well, I guess we'll call this a win and continue to ignore the root of the problem.<p></rant>
I'm fine with changing a word if there is a good reason to.
But I don't like this "wordophobia" where people are afraid of using words and we just keep adding new words that people can't use.<p>It reminds me of the Harry Potter series where they always try to avoid saying the name of Voldemort.
Don't be like that.
I think we should all be like Harry Potter himself and not be afraid of using words, not even the ones that remind us of something bad (which I don't even think these words do).
In an effort to make this thread more interesting:<p>I think we should get used to the idea of just letting stuff like this happen. What's the downside? Is it <i>really</i> so hard to type "main" instead of "master"?<p>I get the argument that historically, language has been used to control populations, and therefore it's good to resist attempts to control language. But every time someone complains about master vs main, I can't help but think thoughts that would be rude to repeat.<p>I recently made a tool for managing TPUs, called tpunicorn (tpudiepie was "clever, but risks legal issues"): <a href="https://github.com/shawwn/tpudiepie" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/shawwn/tpudiepie</a><p>The tool lists a bunch of info about the TPUs, including their master IP address. It's the IP of host 0, in charge of TPU configuration.<p>If someone were to open an issue "Please change master to main," and they were genuine about the request, I'd be like ... ok. And that would be the end of it. It's a s/master/main/g. Sure, whatever.<p>So, my question for you, dear readers: why <i>not</i> just say ok and be done with it? Is the spirit of rebellion really so ingrained in everyone that this is the battle we want to fight? You can mock it, ridicule it, fight it, but ultimately it's a big bikeshed that people want to paint. Why not let them?<p>And, you know, maybe it might help. A female dev I know recently expressed frustration about being called a "guy" constnatly. "Hey guys, ..." It's why I say ya'll. She also feels bad about mentioning it, because she doesn't want to be an imposition.<p>From my point of view, this is a big ball of "whatever, who cares, just do it." But my mind is open: can you convince me that it's important to resist this trend? Without invoking slippery-slope arguments?
I wonder how much outrage there would be (both in favour of and against!) regarding any proposal to remove the OOM killer’s tendencies to child sacrifice:<p><pre><code> Out of memory: Kill process 12345 (chromium) score 678 or sacrifice child
</code></pre>
The first time I encountered it in real life (I never set up any swap on my last laptop, and over a few years bust things up by running out of memory about three times) it made perfect sense and I saw nothing at all amiss with the message, but I know there are amusing tales of people being confused and perhaps even worried by it. After having discovered that, I know I rather like it.
There you have it. The true face of the "Code of Conduct". These guidelines airbrush change rather than promote "inclusivity" which the CoC claims to do.<p>In fact, it shows the controlling infinite demands of the PC crowd in the Linux kernel and the wider ecosystem. Remember Outreachy anyone?<p>> At this stage these guidelines, which are part of the Linux kernel's coding style, are about avoiding new usage of the words "master" and "slave" within the kernel code as well as avoiding "blacklist" and "whitelist".<p>They will still say "it's not enough" and will demand to remove all master / slave references and terminology in the kernel, which the maintainers know it isn't practical. You can ask yourself if this is realistic. I think you know the answer.<p>This doesn't attack the problem and only airbrushes and ignores the root of it. There is no winning with moves like this.
This is lazy pandering and does absolutely nothing to address actual POC issues. It also paints words with zero history of racism in a "bad" light because it's somehow associated with a color?<p>Now we've bulkanized terminology all in the name of progress, ironically making it even harder for newcomers to learn.<p>Overall, it's just a disgusting ineffective move by crusaders determined to police, rewrite and erase language. I can't fathom how anyone decides this is what we should be doing to promote inclusivity.
Is this being recieved positively by those that actually write code, who aren't gripped by a white savior complex? Because it strikes me as patronizing, among other things.<p>Do yourself a favor, lookup the origin of the word "slave". Now consider your emotional response in that light, and how these changes could only be motivated by a deeply held predjudice with regard to the alleged beneficiaries of this farce.
There are many studies that suggest our language does influence our culture. Perhaps the affect isn’t obvious to you like many other things that influence our culture.<p>I don’t understand why some people are still so skeptical about this change.<p>Some argue that we should instead fix bigger problems. Well let’s do that too. But it doesn’t mean that we can't or shouldn’t take small steps. Every small step can contribute. And we shouldn’t stop there.
At least this is a lot less insane than all the “Company XYZ renames everything in their existing products that people use every day”. If you say, “hey I don’t like this phrase, next time I’ll use a different one”, I can actually understand. I still think the big sed is, let’s say, misguided, but at least this version is not insane.
'denylist / allowlist' makes normative presumptions about privilege, thereby creating an unsafe space.<p>All our lists should be inclusive.
Note: This thread was removed from the front page of HN, presumably by the mods. I guess this topic is too spicy for them to handle.<p>Great, now everyone can pat themselves on the back and relax now we've fully embraced cancel culture and find instances of these very naughty words to be outraged about.<p>Oh, and I find subordinate offensive, just because.<p>Congratulations to the Linux kernel for fixing a systemic issue by changing some words, now we can pretend the issue doesn't exist at all! :-)<p>Maybe we should just replace Linus Torvalds whilst we're at it with someone black, just like they did over at Reddit, which clearly fixed all the problems when a white man retired in protest.<p>(How can I flag my own post before anyone else does? By tomorrow I'm expecting to come back and see this text replaced with [flagged] as you can't post anything controversial anymore. I see as of this edit I'm on 12 points, that'll be -10 I am sure when the dust settles. Feel free to cancel me and my account if you want HN crowd, I'll just make another).
With all the actual problems in the world, it's amazing how much energy gets wasted on idiotic stuff like this.<p>There are actual concentration camps in China TODAY.<p>So sad.
Great job folks, you did it, you solved 1000s of years of racism.
Surely not a single POC will be killed by a cop with these changes.<p>Such ineffectual liberalism. So much effort that fixes nothing.
What about service? [0] (related: to serve, to be a servant)<p>(In case you don't see the Google box: Old English (denoting religious devotion or a form of liturgy), from Old French servise or Latin servitium ‘slavery’, from servus ‘slave’. The early sense of the verb (mid 19th century) was ‘be of service to, provide with a service’.)<p>[0] <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=service+etymology" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/search?q=service+etymology</a>