Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP
* Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> [24-02/23=Fr 10:33 +0100]:
>>> It's entirely US political feel-good activism that
>>> doesn't change anything but wastes people's time. Do
>>> you actually think pressing on brake pedal oppresses
>>> anybody? Because it also has master and slave cylinders.
>>>
>>> All it does is wastes tens of thousands of people's time
>>> once they have to fix every script, tool and doc piece
>>> related to it, for absolutely no benefit aside from making
>>> some Twitter activist happy "they did something". It would
>>> *literally* break every single script that [...]
* Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> [24-02/23=Fr 10:07 +0000]:
>> It is "fixing" an issue for today's English speakers. Should
>> we scour our systems looking for similar issues in other
>> languages? Then in, say, 20 years time when different words
>> will then be considered offensive, by some, do this all again?
* Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> [24-03/15=Fr 01:42 +0100]:
> Remember, there are A LOT of words and expressions
> we don't use anymore, and that's good, as
> they are offensive and disrespectful. [...]
>
> [...]
>
> Maybe one should just focus on a few words and expressions that
> are clearly offensive, and remove them from schools, universities,
> public service TV, all official state-related communication, etc.
>
> With no intention of ever creating a 100% offensive-free language,
> removing the worst offenders from the scene often is enough.
Words I find offensive include "authority" and "manager", so checking
`apropos authori manager` I see we have a lot of important work to do.
We also need to do something about book titles like "Mastering $Foo".
Seriously, you humans have only another five billion Earth years until
your sun engulfs your home planet, and you're spending time on *THIS*?!
Reply to: