Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux 5.8 Formally Adds The Inclusive Terminology Guidelines

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    The world is dead...

    Comment


    • #32
      OMG I just merged something in from a git "master" branch- the horrors!

      Comment


      • #33
        LOL. Everyone here freaking out saying "Linux is done" or some variation of that.

        For my money, three years from now, the Linux Kernel will still exist and operate computers as well as, perhaps even better than, today. Let's wait and see who's right.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by wertigon View Post
          This thread will most probably be the shitstorm of the year; see many people kneejerking over this just because - but please look a step further.

          I for one welcome this change, but not because it is using inclusive language; No, rather I welcome this change because it tightens up the terminology in a *lot* of places.

          Master / Slave is very seldom the best terminology. Take, for instance, a CPU core scheduler that delegates tasks with the help of a "master" process and "slave" workers. Isn't it better that these are given more precise names, such as "Controller / Worker" or "Host / Proxy"? This is a much more specific term; and thus, it is much more descriptive. Same thing with a network driver - is it not better to have "Sender / Receiver" or "Requester / Responder"?

          Most people will keep using master / slave language out of habit - if you can, check if there is a more descriptive term first. As a bonus, you won't appear to be a kneejerking douchebag when writing new terminology.
          I agree, I'm all for using clearer terms when possible, I just wished that was the point and not a war on words of terror.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by geearf View Post

            I agree, I'm all for using clearer terms when possible, I just wished that was the point and not a war on words of terror.
            Clearer terms? A war is something completely different. And words can hurt, can't they?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Setif View Post
              Is leader/follower inclusive?
              For the intersectionalists, no - That's still opression.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by wertigon View Post
                Master / Slave is very seldom the best terminology. Take, for instance, a CPU core scheduler that delegates tasks with the help of a "master" process and "slave" workers. Isn't it better that these are given more precise names, such as "Controller / Worker" or "Host / Proxy"? This is a much more specific term; and thus, it is much more descriptive. Same thing with a network driver - is it not better to have "Sender / Receiver" or "Requester / Responder"?
                Personally, I think "master / slave" more precisely encapsulates the behavior expected. At least from how those terms have been used in the Western tradition since the Greeks. Those more precise terms go into unneeded nuance, while "master / slave" expresses the "master" delegates and cancels tasks, while "slave" does as told. "controller / worker" is the same thing for people that are offended by "master / slave" terminology. You just think about how the various forms of slavery worked, and for most cases you get what's going on. Makes a lot of sense for master and slave drives. The other terms do not accurately describe what is going on.



                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by carbonchauvinist View Post
                  Smh, sometimes I'm really ashamed to be a part of the "linux community".. seeing the endless mee-too posts here only works to reinforce that.

                  For those that actually care I'll leave this here:



                  Quoted from excellent post below:

                  Inclusiveness in Language for Outsiders Looking In
                  Except, when they're wrong. I'm all for being understanding, while still explaining why their emotions are objectively wrong. Most of this is directed towards white people feeling guilty over shit done almost 200 years ago.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I find myself troubled by movements like this. It feels too much like "sanitization" to me. I personally believe very little will change for the better because of it. But, there are probably a small number of people who will feel more welcomed in the FOSS community, so I'm willing to defer my opinion.

                    Originally posted by sverris View Post

                    And words can hurt, can't they?
                    ^This

                    What I find much more frustrating is that people allow words to do more damage to them than a bullet or club ever could. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me" was a rule of human society once, long ago. Now bullying is amplified by a victim's willful empowerment of hate speech, or just plain mean words. Why allow oneself to be a victim of words, which sometimes are not even intended to do harm?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      more like "the 1984 guidelines".
                      in most countries we already have thoughtcrime, newspeak and minitrue.
                      what's next ?
                      - mandatory installation of non-binary transgender homosexual apps ?
                      - state law making it a crime to try to remove spyware ?
                      - sharing viruses as a civil duty ?
                      i bet in a few years we'll get reeducation camps "of loving inclusion" with electroshocks therapy, for all those refusing these wonders of modernity.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X