light = life = white = good darkness = death = black = bad
This is an age-old concept used in many aspects in life. Only racists apply this to skin color.
Master/Slave is a technical term, that exactly describes, what is going on, so I don't think, it makes much sense to replace those terms with something kind of similar.
Yes, the origin of these terms is slavery, which is a bad thing. But being enslaved is not a "privilege" of black people. All kinds of people have been enslaved all over the world in history.
When I see these discussions, 1984's Newspeak comes to my mind every time. Abolishing specific terms only because some people are using them in a bad way won't make the world better.
Racist will discriminate people, no matter what words they have available.
Why do you feel like it describes "exactly" what is going on?
I would think because you have the knowledge of what slaves and masters were and are. If you remove the meaning of what a slave is, it does not describe it in any way.
When I see these discussions, 1984's Newspeak comes to my mind every time. Abolishing specific terms only because some people are using them in a bad way won't make the world better.
I totally agree here. The issue must be eradicated from the root, not just add a cover on top.
If you remove the meaning of any word, it does not describe what it had before ;-)
The primary definition of a master/slave relationship - at least for me - is, that the slave has to do exactly what the master commands, and nothing else. IMO this describes exactly the behaviour for almost all topics, that I can think of, where these terms are used.
Words always have meanings, that's why we use them.
We shouldn't let racists force us to restrict our language, just because a non-racist word that is used in many different contexts, could be racist in one specific usage.
We shouldn't let racists force us to restrict our language
I agree with this, although the word slave has really bad connotations, not just racist but un-ethical IMO.
That being said, I have never come across the word Slave being used anywhere in this context, apart from some technical papers from 10y ago or some old docs.
I see more the parent->child naming, or primary/secondary, or process/subprocess...
I agree with this, although the word slave has really bad connotations, not just racist but un-ethical IMO.
I totally agree.
Those terms are used in all kinds of context, like e. g. software, relays, lighting fixtures, busses, BDSM, ...
In some of these contexts it's easy to replace them with other and maybe better fitting terms.
But things are totally different for whitelist/blacklist: Here the origin is not unethical, so i don't see any reason to replace them.
Even if these words aren't necessarily racist, what's wrong with getting rid of what sounds like exclusionary language? It's a relatively minor change compared to what we're used to in the developing world.
Those words by themselves are not racist, it is always the context that makes the meaning. If you think they are exclusionary, it's only in your mind. I usually don't think of racism if I hear those words, but I do recognize some people do. Those words are not exclusionary or racist because they exist, but rather how they are used.
How far do you want to go? Should we really check any context where the words black or white are used for the potential of a racist interpretation? Maybe abolishing the words black and white on the whole would help? I don't see those changes solving any real problems.
Precisely. I really do understand where people are coming from with this, but the efforts - noble as they may be - seem misplaced. The real problems are much bigger, and to be honest - very hard to solve, or even begin to solve. Creating racist problems where they don't exist in such a way as to allow a simple solution may make people feel good that they are solving 'something' or doing their part, but ultimately does nothing to stop racist people being racist, or tackle any of the very real injustices people face. Inserting accusations of racism everywhere at the drop of a hat dilutes the real issues and potentially creates more division where there need not be any.
Developer advocate, full-stack engineer, startup co-founder & CTO, bringing 15 years of experience in Silicon Valley, including at Google and Yahoo!. Public speaker.
Location
🌐
Education
UC Santa Cruz Extension
Work
Developer Advocate at Weaviate, the open-source semantic search engine
Why do we even call people of African/Nigerian descent black? they are brown. It's so strange. I would be all for calling them brown instead of black and leaving these other words whose origins had nothing to do with Africans alone. Do most people even know the Etymology of the word? I think some people hear a word and assume the worst. What does that tell you about those people and what they think anyway? If we are trying to treat everyone equally, (as humans, as people) why do so many people perseverate about these useless things?
light = life = white = good
darkness = death = black = bad
This is an age-old concept used in many aspects in life. Only racists apply this to skin color.
Master/Slave is a technical term, that exactly describes, what is going on, so I don't think, it makes much sense to replace those terms with something kind of similar.
Yes, the origin of these terms is slavery, which is a bad thing. But being enslaved is not a "privilege" of black people. All kinds of people have been enslaved all over the world in history.
When I see these discussions, 1984's Newspeak comes to my mind every time. Abolishing specific terms only because some people are using them in a bad way won't make the world better.
Racist will discriminate people, no matter what words they have available.
Why do you feel like it describes "exactly" what is going on?
I would think because you have the knowledge of what slaves and masters were and are. If you remove the meaning of what a slave is, it does not describe it in any way.
I totally agree here. The issue must be eradicated from the root, not just add a cover on top.
If you remove the meaning of any word, it does not describe what it had before ;-)
The primary definition of a master/slave relationship - at least for me - is, that the slave has to do exactly what the master commands, and nothing else. IMO this describes exactly the behaviour for almost all topics, that I can think of, where these terms are used.
Words always have meanings, that's why we use them.
We shouldn't let racists force us to restrict our language, just because a non-racist word that is used in many different contexts, could be racist in one specific usage.
I agree with this, although the word slave has really bad connotations, not just racist but un-ethical IMO.
That being said, I have never come across the word Slave being used anywhere in this context, apart from some technical papers from 10y ago or some old docs.
I see more the parent->child naming, or primary/secondary, or process/subprocess...
I totally agree.
Those terms are used in all kinds of context, like e. g. software, relays, lighting fixtures, busses, BDSM, ...
In some of these contexts it's easy to replace them with other and maybe better fitting terms.
But things are totally different for whitelist/blacklist: Here the origin is not unethical, so i don't see any reason to replace them.
Even if these words aren't necessarily racist, what's wrong with getting rid of what sounds like exclusionary language? It's a relatively minor change compared to what we're used to in the developing world.
Those words by themselves are not racist, it is always the context that makes the meaning. If you think they are exclusionary, it's only in your mind. I usually don't think of racism if I hear those words, but I do recognize some people do. Those words are not exclusionary or racist because they exist, but rather how they are used.
How far do you want to go? Should we really check any context where the words black or white are used for the potential of a racist interpretation? Maybe abolishing the words black and white on the whole would help? I don't see those changes solving any real problems.
Precisely. I really do understand where people are coming from with this, but the efforts - noble as they may be - seem misplaced. The real problems are much bigger, and to be honest - very hard to solve, or even begin to solve. Creating racist problems where they don't exist in such a way as to allow a simple solution may make people feel good that they are solving 'something' or doing their part, but ultimately does nothing to stop racist people being racist, or tackle any of the very real injustices people face. Inserting accusations of racism everywhere at the drop of a hat dilutes the real issues and potentially creates more division where there need not be any.
Many things:
I wrote more about these and other issues in 8 problems with replacing "master" in Git.
Why do we even call people of African/Nigerian descent black? they are brown. It's so strange. I would be all for calling them brown instead of black and leaving these other words whose origins had nothing to do with Africans alone. Do most people even know the Etymology of the word? I think some people hear a word and assume the worst. What does that tell you about those people and what they think anyway? If we are trying to treat everyone equally, (as humans, as people) why do so many people perseverate about these useless things?
Here is the Etymology:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/866ynp/what_are_the_origins_of_the_words_blacklist_and/dw3svkw?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3