Python Joins Movement To Dump 'Offensive' Master, Slave Terms (theregister.co.uk)

Python creator Guido van Rossum retired in July, but he's been pulled back in to resolve a debate about politically incorrect language. The Register reports: Like other open source communities, Python's minders have been asked whether they really want to continue using the terms "master" and "slave" to describe technical operations and relationships, given that the words remind some people of America's peculiar institution, a historical legacy that fires political passions to this day. Last week Victor Stinner, a Python developer who works for Red Hat, published four pull requests seeking to change "master" and "slave" in Python documentation and code to terms like "parent," "worker," or something similarly anodyne. "For diversity reasons, it would be nice to try to avoid 'master' and 'slave' terminology which can be associated to slavery," he explained in his bug report, noting that there have been complaints but they've been filed privately -- presumably to avoid being dragged into a fractious flame war. And when Python 3.8 is released, there will be fewer instances of these terms.

Comments

Re

[pele]

So what about people who are unable to have children, will they get offended by references to 'parent'?
This has gotten out of hand, definitely.

Re: Re

[pele]

LISP from now on, only.

Re:Re

[stealth_finger]

So what about people who are unable to have children, will they get offended by references to 'parent'? This has gotten out of hand, definitely.

What about orphans, will they take kindly to constantly be reminded of parents? Why won't anyone think of the childrens?

Re: Re

[liquid_schwartz]

time to go binary...

Unfortunately many identify as non-binary. We'll have to keep looking for new metaphors

Re: Re

[SqueakyMouse]

Well thatth thertainly offenthive!

Re: Re

[MouseR]

Did you just frickin assume my preferred language?

Re:Re

[lgw]

The worst part is

given that the words remind some people of America's peculiar institution

Really? Slavery was a thing for all of recorded human history. Even now it's alive and well in places like Qatar. American slavery is an embarrassment to America, as we were slow to abandon it compared to Europe, and it took a war to do so. But slavery as a concept? It's hard to find any location on Earth with a written history that doesn't include slavery staining that history. It's not in any way "America's peculiar institution".

I've heard there are Millennials who were never taught that there were slaves in Europe, Rome, Egypt, Sumeria, etc, basically any place with government established enough to leave written records.

Re:Re

[SCVonSteroids]

What about when you destroy the parent?
You've effectively orphaned its children. Now thats some pretty nasty nomenclature.

Re:Re

[msauve]

I think they should use bourgeois and prole instead.

Re:Re

[magarity]

So what about people who are unable to have children, will they get offended by references to 'parent'?

I suggest the terms "coordinator" and "volunteer".

Re: Re

[DarkOx]

What about people with speech impediments often refereed to as "lisps". Should they be force to be reminded of their disability every day they go into the office?

Re:Re

[BronsCon]

And black people who weren't alive when slavery was commonplace aren't your pawns, either. Can we please stop using them? Seriously, let them rest, they've been free for over a century and a half now.

Re: Re

[K. S. Kyosuke]

LISP is an offensive term, it's called Lisp today. Off with you to a reeducation camp!

Re:Re

[K. S. Kyosuke]

There are many more orphans today in the US than there are slaves, which makes it even more imbecilic.

Re:Re

[cayenne8]

JFC....when will the political correctness stupid shit just die??

This one got to me:

"...given that the words remind some people of America's peculiar institution,:

Seriously? I mean, LOTS of countries had slaves if my history memory serves me right.

For goodness sakes...slavery ended a LONG time ago, get over it...move on.

These terms have nothing to do with slavery in any country.

What's next? Do we have to rename the "master" brake cylinder on your car?

Re:Re

[rl117]

It's fairly certain that they don't know that "slave" and "serf" are derived from "Slav". What, white people were slaves? Surely not! Only blacks suffered from slavery in their world, despite it being a historically worldwide phenomenon.

Re:Re

[Aighearach]

On the one hand, I don't really care which words are used.

On the other hand, I do insist that they be reasonable metaphors for the technical algorithm, and not be misleading.

Primary/Secondary are neutral words, so I understand why you like them, but they do not have the right technical implications. Sometimes you have peers where one is the primary, the other the secondary. You can't overload them to describe also master/slave algorithms.

Nor will you even get to say the words "master/slave" less, because now you'll be explaining those algorithms and the local terminology repeatedly, forever, because those are still the primary technical words used for that category of algorithms. Instead, you'll be constantly explaining to new people, "We don't have slaves because we renamed master/slave to foo/bar. Yes you can still use the same external libraries and networking algorithms, we didn't change the functional relationship, we just renamed it."

Re: Re

[CoolDiscoRex]

Political Correctness flourises during periods of prosperity. This is because the needs of the affluent class are met, and the human mind craves problems to solve. Lacking adequate challenges to overcome, people will create their own. If you pay attention during the next recession, policital correctness will attenuate, only to come roaring back when things turn back around. It's also used as a hedge against lower-class cooperation during periods of expanding wealth inequity. You want the poor black man to look suspiciously at the poor white man, which is why wealthy whites whack the racial bees nest as often as possible then point to the "rednecks", and not the wealthy politicians who routinely sell them all. out. Fewer things scare the upper-classes more than the lower-classes begin to existing relatively peacefully. After all, there's way more of the lower classes than there are of the upper. Divide and conquer.

Re:Re

[thrich81]

This probably violates some written or unwritten /. rule, but I'm going to repeat a reply I made to someone else since your point is the same as theirs. You aren't interpreting "America's peculiar institution" as the historians who use it professionally do.
The reference to slavery as America's "Peculiar Institution" is a term which goes back deep into the 19th century and isn't meant to imply that slavery is peculiar (as in "unique") to America but that slavery in the US was peculiar in the "different from other institutions" sense. It seems to have been coined by by the Southern pro-slavery politician John C Calhoun in 1837. A quick reference:
"PECULIAR INSTITUTION was a euphemistic term that white southerners used for slavery. John C. Calhoun defended the "peculiar labor" of the South in 1828 and the "peculiar domestick institution" in 1830. The term came into general use in the 1830s when the abolitionist followers of William Lloyd Garrison began to attack slavery. Its implicit message was that slavery in the U.S. South was different from the very harsh slave systems existing in other countries and that southern slavery had no impact on those living in northern states." -- from https://www.encyclopedia.com/h... [encyclopedia.com].
The term is seen fairly commonly in scholarly works, including this book from 1956, "The Peculiar Institution: Slavery in the Ante-Bellum South" by Kenneth M. Stampp (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peculiar_Institution).

Re: Re

[BronsCon]

I'd suggest you check your colon, but you were clearly in the middle of a direct visual inspection when you wrote that.

Re:Re

[Alypius]

If you listen to feminists about how frail and fragile women are, you'd think they were arguing for the patriarchy.

Re:Re

[qzzpjs]

What about when you destroy the parent?

Well, normally the parent is expected to destroy all their children first, then die themselves. Can't have orphan processes running around your system... So we probably shouldn't use parent/child either for the analogy. Maybe manager/worker? Then we can think layoffs. :^)

Re:Re

[Mal-2]

"Advisor" and "Doctoral Student".

Re:Re

[Hylandr]

There's this and the rampant slavery currently ongoing in middle east countries to say nothing of the sex slavery trade.

Changing the terms used in a programming language isn't going to stop slavery anywhere. It's just more useless virtue signaling where going out and DOING something to stop slavery. Join the Polaris Project if you want to make a difference, but don't require us to refactor miles of code just to make you feel good.

https://polarisproject.org/

Re:Re

[R3d M3rcury]

Depends on whether you've experienced it.

Back in the '80s, I was working with a contractor who was writing an external process to do some work for the main process that I was working on. We were developing this and doing some testing and his process crashed. So I gave him a call to let him know what messages I was sending it when it crashed. I called him up and said, "Hey, Phil, I just got a child died event..."

*Click*. He hung up the phone.

I called back. No answer.

My co-worker, sitting next to me, told me that I really fucked up. "How so?" "Phil's kid died about 2 months ago. SIDS."

It didn't really matter that the header identified it as a "Child Died Event." And parent/child processes are a common term, as is having a process "die." And I had no idea that this had happened to his kid.

But I still felt like an absolute jerk for the pain that I brought him. And to this day, I try to avoid that terminology when I can.

Dare I say it, there may be terminology that brings up really bad memories in other people. Not everyone has the same experiences as you and certain things may offend them more than they would offend you because of those experiences.

Re:Re

[LynnwoodRooster]

Here you go.

Re: Re

[PetiePooo]

Also as a person from a nation that was ruled by hungarian kingdoms (and later the austro-hungarian empire) for a 1000 years including attempts at hungarization I am strongly offended by "hungarian notation".

Dude, we're all offended by hungarian notation!

Re:Re

[mysidia]

Parent is a REALLY bad term to use as Parent - Child has an established technical meaning that is purely hierarchical positioning - for example: the Parent node in a tree is a higher node in the hierarchy, But that does not imply the Parent node is "In Control of" a child node. That is: parent-child is something completely different from a Master - Slave pairing.

Master - Slave implies that the Master contains all the logic, and the Slave mirrors operations controlled by the master.....

More appropriate relationship names like "Senior/Junior", "Supervisor Node/Work Node", "Active Node / Accessory Node", "Primary / Secondary", "Active / Passive", "Director / Subordinate", "Designated Node / Contributory Node", would imply at least a control aspect rather than a mere positional one.

None of these seem to express the idea as clearly as the one of "Master/Slave" --- it is much more clear the level of control the Master node has in these types of systems.

It's unfortunate that some people may find a way to take offense to that, but IMO that is not adequate justification to switch to more confusing naming schemes or naming schemes that conflict with other similar ideas such as the Parents/Children in hierarchically arranged systems where the CHILD node may actually be the "Master" and the PARENT node may actually be the "Slave" at a particular point in time, from a data distribution standpoint..

Re: Re

[Anonymous Coward]

Political Correctness flourises during periods of prosperity. This is because the needs of the affluent class are met, and the human mind craves problems to solve. Lacking adequate challenges to overcome, people will create their own.

Yep. I often irritate a SJW type I know by reacting to some of his rants with "that's nature's way of telling you there's not enough adversity in your life."

There is another part of it, perhaps. It occurs to me, listening to him, that a lot of this is also a form of self-aggrandizement. The poor downtrodden, whomever they may be, cannot defend (or make decisions for) themselves and need him and his ilk to save them. It's a way of positioning themselves as superior to others while pretending to do the opposite.

Re:Re

[mortonda]

So what about people who are unable to have children, will they get offended by references to 'parent'?
This has gotten out of hand, definitely.

I would think it would be more offensive to "fork a child" ...

Re: Re

[weilawei]

No, you need to grow up. We are adults here, and we learned in elementary school what homonyms are. How many words would you have us invent to alleviate the existence of homonyms and cater to your puerile mind, which immediately has to seek out discriminatory meanings in words that sound or are spelled the same, but have different definitions? How many times would you have us redefine existing terms when some asshole decides to create a discriminatory homonym based on it?

Grow up.

The right to offend is more important than the right to not be offended. That's a requirement for adults, unless you'd rather be treated by a child, with parents to tell you what you should like and what you should be offended by.

The rest of us will just use our brains and decide for ourselves, preserving our liberties and freedom of speech, even (especially) if we have to preserve it for people like you.

Re:Re

[BronsCon]

No, the reason they're trying to do it (they tried in the 90's and failed then, too) is much less meaningful. In fact, it is such a weak reason that allowing it would open a floodgate of "this offends me, change it" that would topple our society in short order. That's why we don't allow that argument to succeed.

Re:Re

[Immerman]

And in fairness it *was* rather peculiar in that it departed greatly from the historical norm for slavery. Pretty much everywhere else the children of slaves were born free, and quite often had a clear route to citizenship as well. Quite often there was a generally accepted route for captured slaves to earn their freedom as well. The idea that someone could be born into lifelong slavery was fairly uncommon.

Re: Re

[arglebargle_xiv]

The same year, Django traded "master" and "slave" for "leader" and "follower."

Or, in its German translation, Fuehrer and AnhÃnger, but the latter can also mean "trailer" so we'll use a more people-specific term, Volk. Fuehrer and Volk, that's it, no-one will be offended by that. It's a good thing there's such a rich (in German, "Reich") set of words to choose from for Django: Fuehrer, Volk, und Reich.

Re:Re

[ceoyoyo]

Always kill the children before you terminate the parent.

Re:Re

[cayenne8]

Actually, slavery did not end "a LONG time ago"... it's still happening all over the world to the tune of 40+ million slaves. https://www.walkfreefoundation... [walkfreefoundation.org]

I'm guessing there's not a lot of python coding going on there, eh?

Re:Re

[Anonymous Coward]

While this is true, ultimately, this is a "them" problem, not a you problem. It's just polite and good nature to realize that one should be careful around a person with a temporary problem or in light of a recent event, but it is the responsibility of that person to eventually get over it. It is *not* the world's job to bend itself around a particular individual's emotional needs.

When my family die, people constantly walk on eggshells around me related to talking about fathers and mothers, etc.. It was appreciated for a short time, but eventually became embarrassing and tedious. I knew it was my job to eventually 'get over it' or if not that, to not claim it's other people's fault when regular conversation brought back painful memories. I do not expect the world to bow to my needs.

I have done similar things to what you describe, and I still feel bad about them years later, but I also know it's not my fault as in this case, you did nothing wrong. It may have been worth a "sorry I didn't know" later if the chance arose.

Re: Re

[vlad30]

Check your priveledge, white man

One thing I have always admired about the US it was the white man who fought against slavery yes he fought another white man however I am struggling to find another war fought on morals rather than for money, land, oil etc. It is those ideals that gave not only africans freedom but many others like mine also, anyone who came from a country where a minority was persecuted where they would like to escape to most would answer the US

Those "white men" deserve more respect and stop using privilege as an insult, privileges are sought after and normally bestowed of someone who has earned it

Re:Re

[nukenerd]

Pretty much everywhere else the children of slaves were born free, and quite often had a clear route to citizenship as well.

Nope. You think those Spanish galley slaves, Roman gladiators, Chinese eunichs etc had a route to freedom? Some slaves got to high rank as slaves went, and did not lead a bad life, but they were a minority. Most slaves in history would be lucky ever to have the chance of children (certainly not eunuchs unless they grew one).

Re:Re

[Gr8Apes]

And in fairness it *was* rather peculiar in that it departed greatly from the historical norm for slavery. Pretty much everywhere else the children of slaves were born free, and quite often had a clear route to citizenship as well. Quite often there was a generally accepted route for captured slaves to earn their freedom as well. The idea that someone could be born into lifelong slavery was fairly uncommon.

Ummm, no. I believe you're thinking of indentured servitude. Check your Romans, Greeks, and Egyptians for starters on slavery in the past. If you were born of a slave, you were a slave from birth. You might have a nice designation (Roman) but you were a slave. That some societies allowed some property, including money, to be "owned" by slaves and that they could sometimes buy their freedom in no way makes for a clear route to citizenship. In fact, citizenship was as exceptional to a freedman as freedmen were to slaves. In all these ways, American slavery was exactly like those others, going back through all of recorded history (minus roughly 1000 years from somewhere in the 400s through the early 1600s.

Re:Re

[sjames]

That may actually be in favor of master/slave since that is vastly less likely to trigger an actual bad memory in a living person.

Re: Re

[arglebargle_xiv]

After I posted this I realised what the real problem is, and how to fix it: Every term you want to use contains connotations of control over something, e.g. A controlling B (master/slave, whatever). No matter what terms you use, in some language or some culture it'll upset someone.

With one exception: There is a specific term for which the controlled not only don't mind, but actively seek it. That's "dom" and "sub". So I think Python should replace all occurrences of "master" and "slave" with "dom" and "sub". And then sit back while the SJWs come up with something else to be offended by, perhaps the blatantly pornographic nature of the letter "B" or the subtly suggestive "J".

more pc stupidity

[Anonymous Coward]

good fucking god. you stupid fucking pc idiots are ruining the world for the majority.

Re:more pc stupidity

[wizkid]

good fucking god. you stupid fucking pc idiots are ruining the world for the majority.

So what's next.... No more /sbin/kill for processes?

Ya know, any app that has "client" in the name probably refers to prostitution... Thats got to go too.

Oh My God! /usr/bin/touch promotes sexual assult. That's got to go too.

totem is going to offend Native Americans....

mount is sexist also....

reject.. That's going to hurt someones feelings, GONE.
Fuck it, lets just burn all the computers and go back to using bows and arrows, and hunting in the woods.....

Re:more pc stupidity

[Anonymous Coward]

excuse me, I have children to kill.

Re:more pc stupidity

[BronsCon]

Because when doing X for Y reason becomes acceptable, Y becomes a viable excuse for any value of X.

Re:more pc stupidity

[Aighearach]

Did you know that lots of young people like to propose changing the word "kill" to something else? That was a thing 20 years ago, it was a thing again 10 years ago, I'd be very surprised if it isn't still a thing now.

I understand why ignorant people would want to constantly change terms; it reduces their disadvantage if they can interfere with communication! But no, in programming some of the important books are still 30+ years old. I'm not going to stop reading them, I'm not even going to stop using consistent terminology!

All they can achieve is that the libraries in that language have a special name, and the words master/slave still get used to explain that fact, but people don't write the words in their actual code. They can't force people not to use the word, and people will still use it, because as has been known since the earlier efforts, they don't have any idea what good replacement words would be.

Re:more pc stupidity

[Scarred Intellect]

Fuck it, lets just burn all the computers and go back to using bows and arrows, and hunting in the woods.....

Shit, the Butlerian Jihad is coming sooner than we thought (and for more inane reasons!).

Re:more pc stupidity

[fish_in_the_c]

other peoples feelings are fine, but there are basically 3 problems here.

1) Changing terminology is not just about feelings in involves time and money that must be used to just make people feel better. The only thing harmed is there feelings, which cost them nothing to change.

2) The actual analogy should reflect the constructs. A slave has no choice but to do what it's master commands, a child has a different kind of relationship to it's parent, a much more equal one then a slave to a master, so adopting terms that are actually more descriptive in there analogy is actually a good thing.

3) What moral principle, reason, or world view are you advocating , in which , the majority, is somehow obligated to spend time and money, and energy appeasing the emotions of the minority? ( we aren't even talking physical health, we are talking emotional comfort). There isn't a single coherent philosophy I'm aware of that advocates taking it to that level. The closest is the Christian ideal of universal respect for the image of God in each person , but even in that your actions need to follow from Love of neighbor and empathy.

You certainly find no argument for equality or even equability in Darwinism, materialism, or atheism, if there is one please frame it for me so I can be educated. Start by defining where you get a universal moral requirement from then work from there please.

The other major world religions have none that I'm aware of.

So your argument for wanting others to expend their resources is basically because I said I want it and I'm god you must obey what I want.

If you can't come up with a better reason then that it makes some people feel better, you don't really have a reason ,because guaranteed it will make at least the same number of people feel good as feel bad and use resources of time and money that could be put to better use somewhere else.

It's also important to actually have a reason because where Do you stop, are Christians or Satanist offended at the world Daemon? Is know there are minorities offended by the term 'Darwin' OS and the use of the 'sexual and sinful symbol' Apple. If you can't articulate your reason, you have no way of articulating your limits to that reason and frankly, you rob human dialog of everything colorful and meaningful if you remove from it every term and idea that offends someone, because there is someone offended by nearly everything. So how do you choose who's emotions to appease and whose not too.

Re:more pc stupidity

[fibonacci8]

Fuck it, lets just burn all the computers and the vegans and go back to using bows and arrows, and hunting in the woods.....

If you insist.

facepalm

[ganjadude]

seriously? this is what the world is becoming????

Re:facepalm

[Kohath]

The Progressive religion is coming for you sinners and blasphemers!

Re:facepalm

[Austerity Empowers]

Where you see doom and gloom I see opportunity.

master -> general
slave -> private

master -> professor
slave -> grad student

master -> manager
slave -> Individual Contributor (IC)

master -> landlord
slave -> tenant

master -> bourgeoisie
slave -> proletariat

master -> oenophillic
slave -> hophead

master -> overlord
slave -> feckless heathens

master -> Hard Working American
slave -> Parasite

master -> owner
slave -> laborer

master -> manager
slave -> H1B

I could do this all day. The major takeaway is you can change the words, but the relationship is still there. I say do away with master/slave if only because it is somewhat outdated. In the spirit of hacktivism, let's choose a relationship that's more near and dear to problems we have today!

Re:facepalm

[lgw]

seriously? this is what the world is becoming????

Meh, it's not new. Editorial guidance for ANSI/ISO stanrds from 20 years ago included avoidance of "slave" (the oddball "master/peer" was recommended), as well as "cancelled, not aborted or killed" and "processed, not executed".

It gets silly, but then some technical terms become more offensive in translation, and that's a reasonable concern for a global audience.

Re:facepalm

[Anonymous Coward]

My stake is that terminology is all it is. We are referring to technical operations and relationships. They could care less what they are called. The fact that someone, somewhere, at some random time MIGHT have the hurt feelings because a word was used is pathetic reasoning to do what the SJW/PC crowd is now on a crusade for.

By all means, lets strike out every possible word that MIGHT hurt someone's feelings. Personally, I vote for "diversity" to be stricken next. In it's current context it offends me greatly, so that means we strike that one too right ?

Re:facepalm

[c]

let's choose a relationship that's more near and dear to problems we have today!

master -> lobbyist
slave -> politician

Re:facepalm

[skoskav]

master -> snake charmer
slave -> python

Re:facepalm

[alvinrod]

The terms were chosen by people with no particular connection to them, and there has always been a bit of simmering annoyance from people who do have a connection.

Who has a connection to slavery in the U.S. at this point outside of a small number of people who are typically smuggled into the country and forced to engage in prostitution, or perhaps a small number of immigrants who were essentially slaves in their native countries prior to emigrating? There's no one alive today who was a slave in the traditional sense (i.e., where this connection comes from), and I suspect you'd be hard pressed to find many people alive who even had grand parents who were slaves.

Further, almost any person can claim a connection to slavery if they want to look back far enough in their family history. It doesn't matter where you're from, your ancestors were serfs, indentured servants, chattel slaves, or a member of some other caste that lacked full status as a citizen or freeman. How far does a person get to go back in their ancestral history before we get to roll our eyes at them and tell them to stop being such a prat?

It also seems paradoxical that the umbrage taken to terminology such is this is more prevalent now, some three or four decades later (or more since someone may have broached this topic even before the 80's) when that connection to slavery would diminished due to the passage of time. The younger generations that seem so eager to seek victim status for long-past history are the generations farthest removed from it. If they want to make the world a better place, they need to get outside and help actual people who are suffering. Engaging in keyboard warrior internet slacktivism does nothing.

Re:facepalm

[Aighearach]

Charmer/python is the first proposal I've seen that would at least imply the right technical relationship! Good work.

Re:facepalm

[Seven Spirals]

Pythons everywhere scream in agony and offense at your unfair characterization of them. How do you know they will be charmed? Is a Python the same as a Cobra? No. You sir, are trying to cobratize all pythons. Expect the SJW police to show up at your door any moment!

Re:facepalm

[djinn6]

Frankly all of those can offend people. Just call it what it is:

Master -> Controller
Slave -> Controlled

Or better yet:
Master -> Political Correctness
Slave -> White Men

I nominate:

[leftCoaster]

"Gru" and "Minion"

Oh for fuck's sake

[SensitiveMale]

Does PC cultures have to infect everything?

Everyone knows that it won't stop there. A few years later there will be more "offensive" words that need to be changed. Personally, I won't stop being offended until we're all coding in machine code and then I'll fight for machine rights because who are we to tell them their language?

Re:Oh for fuck's sake

[jythie]

Unless we return to an single homogeneous ethnostate, yes, it is going to infect everything because it is everything. PC culture is just what people call it when those who they view as not knowing their place try to have the same consideration as their betters. If you 'stop' it, all you do is assert another PC culture in its place catering to other demographic groups.

Re:Oh for fuck's sake

[Dan541]

We need to abolish arrays.

Idea of placing one thing before another is offensive to retards.
All elements should get equal participation.

Re:Oh for fuck's sake

[quantaman]

Does PC cultures have to infect everything?

Everyone knows that it won't stop there. A few years later there will be more "offensive" words that need to be changed. Personally, I won't stop being offended until we're all coding in machine code and then I'll fight for machine rights because who are we to tell them their language?

I personally don't see the need.

But I give more weight to the offence felt by the descendants of slaves (who still deal with racism and slavery apologists) than the offence felt by people asked to use a different set of technical terms.

Re:Oh for fuck's sake

[hey!]

Well, every orthodoxy, left or right, has its own version of it; it always looks ridiculous when viewed from the outside. To me it seems kind of silly to get upset about a ball player kneeling during the national anthem, but I don't doubt that people are sincerely offended.

This particular form of PC comes out two things: (1) Niceness -- a desire not to hurt anyone's feeligns and (2) Optimism, of a sort peculiar to young people and engineers: if there's a problem we can just *fix* it.

Well some problems just can't be fixed. You can't eliminate friction from mechanical systems, and you can't eliminate social friction from human societies. The only way to keep people from offending each other would be to separate them so thoroughly that nobody ever encounters anyone who was in any way different from them in opinions and outlook. If you've ever been married you'll realize that pretty much means we'd all be on our own.

So either we learn to live with each other, which may make us miserable, or we learn to live apart, which will certainly make us miserable.

Re:Oh for fuck's sake

[dunkelfalke]

Good idea, let's replace arrays with vectors.

Re:Oh for fuck's sake

[kenai_alpenglow]

Robots, too. "Robot" deriving from a Czech word meaning "slave"

Re:Oh for fuck's sake

[BronsCon]

But I give more weight to the offence felt by the descendants of slaves (who still deal with racism and slavery apologists) than the offence felt by people asked to use a different set of technical terms.

While I can see why this would be the case, you also need to give consideration to the implication of allowing the terms to change. Whatever takes their place will have the same meaning and will, in short order, become offensive to the same group, in a never-ending cycle. It's not that we're offended by the suggestion that we change the terminology (thus why someone else's offense might hold more weight than ours -- because we are not offended to begin with), but that we recognize that it is a futile and wasteful effort and choose not to entertain it.

Re:Oh for fuck's sake

[fafalone]

Oh please, there's 10,000 privileged white kids living on mommy and daddy's money who are doing the complaining for every legitimately offended black person. And no, they don't want the same consideration, they want superior consideration. They want to crucify every white person who uses even the slightest perceived offensive term while every anti-white term, stereotype, and other insult remains firmly on the table. Anyone who still thinks these PC SJWs stand for equality is deluded or lying, it's all about inverting the power structures, not leveling them.

Re:Oh for fuck's sake

[markdavis]

>"But I give more weight to the offence felt by the descendants of slaves (who still deal with racism and slavery apologists)"

Sorry, but just about EVERYONE was a descendant of slaves when you go far back enough in history. It doesn't matter your race, skin color, ethnicity, or country. Slavery had existed for many thousands of years just about everywhere and was still quite prevalent just several hundred years ago. Statistically, it is very probable anyone can trace their ancestors back to at least one that was a slave.

Same thing with "racism", it is not exclusive to any one group or demographic. Never has been, never will be.

Same thing with "class"

Same thing with "family background"

People need to stop playing the victim cards/roles and take responsibility for their own life, actions, speech, activities, beliefs, whatever.

I agree

[Anonymous Coward]

The terms are needlessly evocative. I propose we use "dom/sub" instead

peculiar

[michaelmalak]

The use of "peculiar institution" without quotation marks or preceded by "so-called" is even more offensive. At least the Register article has it as a hyperlink, but the Slashdot blockquote lacks it.

"peculiar institution"?

[110010001000]

How is slavery America's "peculiar institution"? Slavery has existed for centuries in many countries. It still exists to this day, even though people continue to ignore it.

Re:"peculiar institution"?

[ErikTheRed]

If something terrible is happening but it's not trending on social media then nobody gives a shit. The overwhelming majority of people in the US only get outraged when their peer group tells them to. Whether such outrage is sensible, proportionate, or useful is never a consideration. Being seen to "care" is what's important.

Re:"peculiar institution"?

[Kohath]

How is slavery America's "peculiar institution"?

Playing victim in the US can get you paid.

Re:"peculiar institution"?

[Anonymous Coward]

More like millennia. Black slavery is relatively new, used to be you just grabbed whomever from whatever land you pillaged. Rome had educated Greek slaves etc. Heck, the word "slave" comes from "Slavic" as the Slavic people were most commonly enslaved in the middle ages. Predominately black slavery is a new phenomenon due to sugar plantations and the climate of these plantations being close to Africa. It was also thought that blacks were more resistant to malaria etc.

Re:"peculiar institution"?

[Green Mountain Bot]

How is slavery America's "peculiar institution"?

You might check with John C. Calhoun, who coined the term in the 1820s.

Re:"peculiar institution"?

[thrich81]

I'm not a historian but ... The reference to slavery as America's "Peculiar Institution" is a term which goes back deep into the 19th century and isn't meant to imply that slavery is peculiar (as in "unique") to America but that slavery in the US was peculiar in the "different from other institutions" sense. It seems to have been coined by by the Southern pro-slavery politician John C Calhoun in 1837. A quick reference:
"PECULIAR INSTITUTION was a euphemistic term that white southerners used for slavery. John C. Calhoun defended the "peculiar labor" of the South in 1828 and the "peculiar domestick institution" in 1830. The term came into general use in the 1830s when the abolitionist followers of William Lloyd Garrison began to attack slavery. Its implicit message was that slavery in the U.S. South was different from the very harsh slave systems existing in other countries and that southern slavery had no impact on those living in northern states." -- from https://www.encyclopedia.com/h....
The term is seen fairly commonly in scholarly works, including this book from 1956, "The Peculiar Institution: Slavery in the Ante-Bellum South" by Kenneth M. Stampp (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peculiar_Institution).

Re:"peculiar institution"?

[110010001000]

Thats great. So why use it in this context? Is the article writer pro-slavery? It is hardly a peculiar institution and to use that term is offensive in itself.

Top Five Alternate Master/Slave Terms

[SuperKendall]

5) Windshield/Bug

4) Ampulex compressa / Periplaneta americana

3) Eastwood / Punk

2) Wall / Mime

1) PC / Wrongthink

We been down this road...

[The Original CDR]

The Los Angeles County tried to ban Master/Slave for IDE cables in 2003

One such recent example included the manufacturer’s labeling of equipment where the words “Master/Slave” appeared to identify the primary and secondary sources. Based on the cultural diversity and sensitivity of Los Angeles County, this is not an acceptable identification label.

Re:We been down this road...

[Ambassador Kosh]

IDE cables are a great way to show the problem.

Many motherboards had primary and secondary slots and each slot had a master and a slave connector.

There are still a number of things like to DNS and other network services where primary and secondary are not the same as master and slave and a primary or secondary dns server can have slave servers.

I understand coming up with different terms but we also need to make sure the new terms are not more confusing than what we have already.

Re:We been down this road...

[dissy]

The Los Angeles County tried to ban Master/Slave for IDE cables in 2003

In the electronic manufacturing industry I work kinda-in (purely IT, but still) we had a similar push not long ago to ban Male/Female when referring to connectors and instead use Plug/Jack.
"Mating", the verb form, was changed to "Connect"

A bit later this was changed again as the previously-female term "Jack" was offensive being a predominantly male name, so it became Plug/Socket.

Even later as more complex connectors came into common use, it was noticed that things like the USB-A connectors had an outside shield component that made ground contact when plugged in, but at the same time the inserting component went *into* the cable where the 4 conductive plate traces were.
Basically the previously-male side has a shroud that completely envelops the entire previously-female side when connected.

The decades old term for these are "hermaphroditic shrouded connectors", which was also found offensive and changed to "surround connector"

There was also "hermaphroditic non-shrouded connectors" previously called "genderless" which can connect both cable-to-panel as well as cable-to-cable, which are now to be called "combination connectors"

The latest change we had to make was to retain the Plug/Socket terms but on the technical side no longer use "Plug" to replace "Male" and "Socket" to replace "Female"
Instead "Socket" is whichever end is fixed in place (IE on a circuit board or a panel) and "Plug" to refer to a movable connector (IE at the end of a cable)
So, the terms no longer indicate the obvious physical appearance of the connector, but how the connector is used.

This also means for the previously-genderless instances of a cable-to-cable connection, you are to say it is two *sockets* connecting, and you can't have two plugs that connect.

Confused yet?

Slavery is American!

[Glarimore]

given that the words remind some people of America's peculiar institution

I find it odd how 'slavery' is so often framed as an American phenomenon, when it was/is a worldwide institution. The US was simply the last superpower to abolish it locally. Slavery is unfortunately alive and well, which should be clear to anyone willing to take a look around.

As for the topic at hand: The folks arguing for this might have a point if the terms being used were 'whitey' and 'blackey' or something equivalently racist, but I find the terms 'master' and slave' to be sufficiently "anodyne" considering they refer to a relationship between two things and neither term explicitly refers to a particular type of individual. Are we going to get rid of 'parent' and 'child' as well because some people were beaten by their parents?

Re:Slavery is American!

[drinkypoo]

The US was simply the last superpower to abolish it locally.

China still has labor camps. That's state-sponsored slavery, right on its face. Here in the USA, we do things like pay Inmates $1/day to fight fires. While that technically involves payment, in reality that's just disguised slavery.

Many developed nations continue to have institutionalized slavery, including superpowers.

Really!

[oldgraybeard]

Ugh This PC Correctness just makes me shake my head. I can live with some of the doing away with the 12 year old boy locker room stuff and the vulgar stuff . After all we do want to create an environment for all.
But I write code and create things. Everything around this safe space, I'm offended by everything! environment just gives me heart burn because it has nothing to do with writing code and creating tech.
If an individual is capable (but kinda) and ass. Hey that happens in the real world. If an individual or Company are jerks I can move on.
But renaming thing because some might be offended even when the terms are completely out of the bad context is a waste of time that might be used for more productive things.
This is all just my personal feelings and opinions. So I hope we can just have a discussion.

Just my 2 cents ;)

Re: So what's the alternative?

[orlanz]

I don't even think it is problematic. The real problem seems to be people who are taking terms outside their intended space. Why are we linking a scar on human history to terms explaining technical relationships?

I hope BDFL tells everyone to either shut up and get back to work or fork something on 4chan.

Re:So what's the alternative?

[stealth_finger]

I agree master-slave is problematic, but what are you going to use in place?

Dom-sub? Capitalist-proletariat? PHB-engineer?

Do they really want to open this can of worms?

Why is it problematic? Because it perfectly describes the relationship between the devices? Slavery has been going on since one caveman had a bigger stick than the next and doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon, it's a lot bigger than a ~250 year period in one country that ended ~150 years ago. With all due respect to the USA, you need to get over that shit.

Who can say?

[Jahoda]

I don't know. On the one hand we can say that this is the result of "feel good but do nothing" culture taken too far. On the other hand, slavery is pretty fricking gross.

I really just don't know, but I guess in the larger context of life it seems like a pretty dumb thing for me to care about. Being upset about changing the terminology, that is.

Re:"Politically correct," ...

[liquid_schwartz]

... also known as "being polite."

You can try and equate the two but it isn't true. One can be polite and still discuss master / slave on USB and other appropriate topics. One cannot be politically correct and do the same.

daemons?

[Bandit2]

I'm a religious man, and don't my computer to spawn daemons... Please rename to something less offensive.

The Orwellians are mining for offense.

[ErikTheRed]

This trend of seeking offense where none is intended is incredibly toxic to humanity. In the English language many words have different meanings based on their context. It's plainly obvious that no allusion to human slavery is meant in the context of software or hardware module relationships.

Let's be blunt about what has happened: people have been abusively harmed by others lying to them and telling them that context is meaningless. They have been given invented forms of discomfort in order to make them slaves to unpleasant emotional responses that have no underlying basis in reality. That's the irony here. The people complaining about the terminology are behaving in a herd manner, controlled by powermongers who benefit from it. Power flows from irrational group cohesion, and the cheapest and easiest form irrational group cohesion is hatred of the other. There are many ways to define the "other" and you can see it everywhere in politics: race, nationality, language, religion, gender, sexual orientation, and (seriously, humanity actually went here) word choice. Both conservatives and progressives exploit these shamelessly. Stop playing their games.

Re:So what's the alternative?

[Kjella]

I agree master-slave is problematic, but what are you going to use in place?

I think replacing master is stupid because you have things like "master data", "master recording" etc. where master is simply the authoritative source and that's the role of the master server too. It's slave that's anthropomorphic, derogatory and also kinda a term of art, I mean you could set up master-slave replication but you'd never say you enslaved a server. Master-servant would be a nudge better but still anthropomorphic. If we're changing the term I'd suggest master-puppet, it's pretty much exactly that - something pulling the strings on an inanimate object. It sounds kinda odd particularly since puppet master is already is a term but the newspeak would at least be logical.

much ado about nothing

[vux984]

I'm firmly in the camp that thinks this is much ado about nothing.

But in the spirit of it being much ado about nothing, it seems absurd for me to get worked up about it. So if let them try to change it if it makes them feel better... if it gets traction and sticks... fine, whatever.

Re:much ado about nothing

[vux984]

"Continuity of literature, documentation,..."

Yeah, nobody is going to lose any sleep over a footnote that says "The manager worker or pattern used to be called master / slave or whatever they end up with.

"APIs, and working code?"

Existing APIs and code can continue to use it until they get retired. Its not like its a python keyword or something. From what I can see this was a documentation and code samples update; so its not in the docs and example code.

Much ado about nothing.

Because we kept it going longer than anybody

[rsilvergun]

longer than it was even useful (the Northern states were out performing the Southern one's economically because the south had too much capital tied up in slaves). We also fought a civil war over it.

Re:Because we kept it going longer than anybody

[110010001000]

No we didn't keep it longer than anyone. It is amazing how ignorant people are of human history. In addition, slavery exists to this day. Furthermore the Civil War wasn't fought over slavery. Back to school for you.

Re:Because we kept it going longer than anybody

[whoever57]

Slavery still exists in the USA today:

"Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

This is really sick!

[grumpy-cowboy]

It's time to ban 0 and 1 because it can offends non-binary peoples!

Just a thought here.

[hey!]

The thing that makes slavery wrong is that it treats people as if they were things without free will or feelings or purpose other than to serve us. Software modules actually are things without free will, feelings, or purpose other than to serve us.

It's offensive to call an adult black man "boy". It doesn't mean "boy" is an inherently offensive word or concept.

If you take a consequentialist view of ethics, the consequences of banning the word "slave" is that we no longer have a word to describe that concept. It does nothing for people actually are or were enslaved. How would you write a biography of Frederick Douglass? If you have a deontological view of ethics, there is no equivalence between describing an act and participating in the act; you can't end rape by not allowing people to use the word "rape".

People overall have a magical.view of words, which is why everyone is keen to police everyone else's language. That's how we ended up calling the place we poop the "rest room", which is kind of bizarre when you think of it.

Re:"Politically correct," ...

[kenai_alpenglow]

Because the goal posts keep moving. Look at the chain of words considered polite to use for someone who has trouble walking for an example. The words used for someone who has more melanin in their skin than other folks for another. Why not put the onus on the LISTENER instead of the SPEAKER for a change? Just because a snowflake gets offended doesn't mean the person speaking intended to be offensive.

Re:"Politically correct," ...

[Nocturna81]

The two are not mutually exclusive.

It's kinda obvious that some people are uncomfortable with the terminology.

How difficult is it for pliable minds to simply adopt another set of words to describe, precisely, the same thing?

What motivation exceeds being polite?

Being correct? Because screw being polite if it means it muddies the waters. Also, why do "we" need to be pliable? Why can't the other side of this argument get over themselves and accept that words can have different meaning depending on context?

Re:So what's the alternative?

[avandesande]

more importantly master/slave is a common engineering term such as master/slave cylinders that predates computers

Fucking idiotic.

[jcr]

"Master" and "slave" perfectly convey the concept. Pandering to SJW language police is not only a waste of time, it encourages them to waste our time on this kind of trivia.

-jcr

use words with denoted meaning, not metaphors

[SlithyMagister]

Master and Slave are metaphors for the controller and the controlled.

So use those, or synonyms of them.

Done

Re:"Politically correct," ...

[thomst]

SqueakyMouse opined:

Political correctness is following somebody else's guidelines for what is acceptable speech. As a result it can come across as insincere. The speaker may even resent being coerced into speaking that way. Politeness comes from the individual and so comes across as more heartfelt and sincere.

Rather than getting to the root of the problem, political correctness simply encourages people to mask their real views until an opportunity to vote in somebody who shares their disdain for political correctness comes along. The more they feel their free speech has been trampled upon, the more keen they'll be to vote this way.

I wish I had mod points left. Unlike so many others that get one, your comment actually deserves a +1 Insightful upmod ...

Re:AGAIN?!

[Sigma 7]

They did this back in the early 90s when hard drive controllers were paired (y'all remember the PATA ribbon drive cables, right kids?) with a master drive and a slave drive

That actually made sense to rename them, because the "slave" drive was independent of the "master" drive. No need to declare offense, it simply was the incorrect terms to use.

This doesn't extend to what appears to be the current use in Python. In this case, it's mostly trying to dodge offense.

Re:"Politically correct," ...

[ganjadude]

because everyone is offended at things, we should not ban everything because some individuals might be intentionally offended at it. south park covered this in their x mas special in season 3 or so.

Down with man!

[mi]

While we are at this, when will the sexist man command be renamed?..

I'd say, let's name it doc, but that's not very egalitarian either, as it implies a level of education unattainable to so many of the less fortunate. Plus, to some it also invokes the horribly racist imagery of Looney Tunes.

If you've read this far and aren't outraged, you are a racist too — buy some racism credits to atone for the incorrect thoughts.

Re: Nice false equivalence

[BronsCon]

There may be a point you're missing, so let me spell it out for you: Black people who are alive today are not the same people who experienced Black slavery in America. When they claim they're the same people, they're guilty the same fallacy you're pointing out in my comment. If I'm wrong, so are they, and it needs to be left in the past where it belongs. Yes, I was inaccurate. On purpose. For a reason.

Keep it in history books, discuss it, make sure people understand why it was wrong so it doens't happen again, then move on. Anything else just perpetuates racism.

Political correctness

[sjbe]

JFC....when will the political correctness stupid shit just die??

Probably never. Whether that is a good thing or not depends on the circumstances. Some of it is legitimate calling to task of bad behavior. Many other bits are needless over reactions to jokes or other innocuous statements. For example it a political comedian like Bill Mahrer shows up on your college campus, lighten the fuck up and recognize a joke for what it is.

For goodness sakes...slavery ended a LONG time ago, get over it...move on.

Tell that to anyone who grew up prior to 1964. Just because slavery was officially ended in the US by the Civil War, doesn't mean everything suddenly became fair and equal or that we aren't feeling the effects of it even today. Furthermore there is still an active slave trade going on today. Just because it isn't legal doesn't mean it doesn't still happen. There are an estimated 20-70 million slaves in the world TODAY. No need to get triggered over just the term but let's not pretend it isn't a real thing.

These terms have nothing to do with slavery in any country.

That's simply not true. The terms did not appear out of thin air. They having nothing to do with specific instances of slavery but they unquestionably reference the practice. Same with references to male and female gender connector or terminals which has a clearly sexual origin for the term. Again, we don't have to get all triggered about it but you can't deny the origin of the term. That said if we have an alternative term available (and we do) do we really need to actively use ones that reference reprehensible or needlessly graphic practices?

Re: Bus slaves

[Anne Thwacks]

In most of the world, regardless of civilised or not, slavery is not connected with race, and in some countries is still going on.

The relationship between subsystems on a bus is most definitely NOT parent-child - which may be appropriate for (example) software tasks.

When the bus master tells you to jump, it tells you when and how high. I do not want my peripheral subsystems being incited to rise up against their masters just because Americans have linguistic problems.

This is not a case for re-education: some people need to be sent to an educational system in the first place.

Re: Bus slaves

[BronsCon]

In most of the world, regardless of civilised or not, slavery is not connected with race, and in some countries is still going on.

The above is correct. It has also been discussed elsewhere in the thread.

"Makers"

[slipped_bit]

I have no problem with master and slave used to define relationships of subsystems, but here are a few terms that should be reverted:

"makers" -- They're hobbyists.
"life hack" -- a useful tip
"shield" -- Why the heck did this term come to replace the phrase "daughter board"?
"ends" -- Connectors. Seriously, I bought some cable from a guy once and he asked if I wanted the "ends." The what? "The ends. The ends for the cable." At the time I had worked with electronics for 25+ years and had never heard that term used to describe a connector.

But at least now when I hear that a "maker" has a "life hack" on how to attach the "ends" to his "shield" I know what the hell he or she is talking about. Now I just need to figure out if that shield is the parent or child.

Re:"Makers"

[Fly Swatter]

Notice that each one of those is easier and quicker to type into a keyboard/touch screen.

Considering we still do slavery

[fyngyrz]

Considering we still do slavery, seems premature to me:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

The US has 1.5 million people in prison as of 2018...

...many of whom are there for "crimes" of a personal or consensual nature, and many of whom are used as barely- or un-paid labor, while at the same time being sucked dry financially for simple things like phone calls.

...yeah, I think "master" and "slave" can definitely remain around in their original context for quite some time.

Re:Considering we still do slavery

[fyngyrz]

What you don't get is that burying the terminology contributes to burying the problem. If we didn't have the problem, it would be no big deal to take it or leave it, honestly; I have zero sensitivity to events 150 years ago. But we do still have the problem. So these issues need to be kept on the table. It's good that the PC butterflies are making a stink about this. Let them scream; the noise is useful. But don't capitulate. Slavery isn't dead. It should be, but it isn't.

Re: Considering we still do slavery

[fyngyrz]

You should be just as angry and outraged that the word Slave is in the dictionary. It's just as relevant.

You're very confused. I'm not in the least offended or angry by use of master / slave in the engineering context, or by these words remaining in our vocabulary in general. Quite the opposite.

I am offended by our filthy excuse of a legal system, though.

Re:Considering we still do slavery

[Darinbob]

But these are the accurate terms here. Just because human slavery is evil shouldn't have any bearing on whether you have a master cylinder versus a slave cylinder. It doesn't promote or denigrate slavery, it is completely neutral.

Is the concern that saying "slave" is a trigger word?

Anyway, I remember old textbooks where you had father and son nodes, and that changed almost universally to be parent/child way back before political correctness arose.

Re: Considering we still do slavery

[pollarda]

Since everyone is offended nowadays, I'm offended by their statement that it is a peculiar institution in the USA. Someone needs to go back and read their history. The Romans practiced slavery. The Greeks practiced slavery. The Africans did too even before they sold their slaves to the Europeans. The European institution of serfdom wasn't too far off. The Hitites practiced slavery, the Babylonians too. The Jews were slaves in Egypt. Pretty much all of history had slaves. To single it out as a singularly American institution is a bit nieve.

Re: Considering we still do slavery

[jpaine619]

I never had that problem, because I didn't commit crimes.

More likely was that you didn't know you had committed crimes.

There's a book called "3 felonies a day", that goes into a bit of detail and examples of how many normal people commit felonies and don't even realize it. It discusses the fact that many laws are so vague that they can be interpreted very widely.. This gives prosecutors a huge amount of leeway to find _something_ to charge you with. It also talk a bit about how the concept of "intent" has largely disappeared in modern jurisprudence.

Granted, some are a stretch, and you'd probably had to have really pissed someone off to get charged... But the laws are on the books..

Ever call in sick when you weren't? Maybe you haven't, but some of us have.. That's fraud. Specifically you are guilty of a "scheme or artifice to defraud" the company to their "intangible right to your "honest services"/

So yeah.. You probably have committed some crimes... It would be more unusual if you were squeaky clean.

Re: Considering we still do slavery

[astrofurter]

Are you NOT offended by the American Gulag and the kangaroo courts that feed it? Many good patriotic people think it's an abomination to God and man alike - a disgrace to our nation.

Re: Considering we still do slavery

[dwillden]

You have no idea what a gulag is if you think the US prison system and the justice system is in any way comparable to the Soviet Gulag.

We have a criminal justice system, with many protections for the accused. Do mistakes still happen on rare occasion, yes, that comes from having humans involved, we make mistakes. But the vast majority of those incarcerated are there for one reason alone. They committed a crime and were caught and this is their just punishment.

As the saying goes, don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

The soviet gulags were used to punish dissidents and political opponents, the housing conditions were harsh at best (unheated quarters in Siberia). Death was often the only escape. Our prisons are lavish 5 star hotels by comparison, with free education opportunities for bettering ones self. Dissidents and political opponents don't disappear into our prison for decades or forever. You have to be found guilty of an actual crime.

Yes the system could be better, but it is no gulag.

Re: Considering we still do slavery

[The123king]

Education is only a benefit if it can be used to get a job once released. Most businesses won't employ people with a criminal record, so it's almost pointless.

Re: Considering we still do slavery

[Opportunist]

You have to be found guilty of an actual crime.

Unfortunately that's not even true. What's required is you being accused of a crime and having a lazy court mandated lawyer who doesn't give a shit how the case ends and whose only motivation is to get out of it as fast as he possibly can, telling you straight up that you'll accept a crappy "deal" you're offered or he'll do his best that you regret it if you actually dare to go to court and waste his time.

You are, by the way, a minimum wage worker with zero money and no legal training. Good luck.

Re:Considering we still do slavery

[bentcd]

Actually I think we do need to change it. We need to bring programming into the modern world.

master/slave should be changed to warden/convict.

Re:Considering we still do slavery

[DNS-and-BIND]

That's appropriate, since Americans invented slavery so that they could use it on black people.

dump Python, use Perl!

[KiloByte]

Yeah, it is time to boycott a language where political correctness trumps technical merit -- especially if the same language enforces whitespace bondage&discipline. So drop Python, we welcome you on the Perl side!

Re: Bus slaves

[drinkypoo]

In most of the world, regardless of civilised or not, slavery is not connected with race, and in some countries is still going on.

Sure it is, perhaps not deliberately, but it's associated and that's a kind of connection. Some races are disproportionately targeted for slavery because they are easier to target.

Re:Bronscon pretending the legacy of slavery is go

[BronsCon]

As with any hardship, the effects will last as long as those affected allow them to last. I personally know many Black people who've gotten over it and moved on to become productive members of society. Most of them are doing quite well for themselves, many are doing better than I am. And good for them, having overcome such an atrocity is a real show of strength and integrity.

If only you knew the shit I've actually experienced in my lifetime... that I also have moved on from. But that's not the point. The point is it's in the past and you decide how much the past affects you. Regardless of race.

Partners

[manu0601]

Like your boss became your business partner, let us call them computing partners, so that the existing hierachy is not visible anymore in the name, and nobody is offended.

Seriously, the master/slave naming was not appropriate, because both computer slave and mater do work. That is a difference from historic human master and slave, where only the slave does work.

Re:5 Reasons Python Sucks Anyway

[cmcqueen1975]

Again, no. Most of it is comparable with C speed.

How can you say that with a straight face?

I suppose C and Python do have comparable speed—they can be compared. Like the speed of a tractor and an F1 can be compared (the tractor is slower).

Re:Exactly!

[Antique Geekmeister]

non-binary-non-racial-gender-queer-safe-space-resident and college president.

Re: Bus slaves

[ArsenneLupin]

When the bus master tells you to jump, it tells you when and how high.

And he will tell you to sit in the back. So we need to ban the term bus as well.