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.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
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.