News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel. Parent comment

Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by ThrowawayR2 on Sunday July 12, 2020 @08:04PM (#23815819)
> "Think about how that sounds from the perspective of someone learning this: “we don’t actually use this term following the dictionary definition, we just like keeping it instead of using more accurate words”"

A bus doesn't have four wheels. An interpreter isn't a human being with language fluency. A bit doesn't refer to the business end of a drill. A port isn't a place where you find cargo ships. People manage to deal with jargon just fine.

> "What do we lose by switching to precise terms which don’t require everyone to internalize an overloaded meaning in multiple contexts?"

The time wasted reeducating (and I use that word intentionally) everyone?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by acdha on Sunday July 12, 2020 @08:59PM (#23816092)
Again, the problem isn’t jargon as a concept but that a few specific terms have negative connotations. “Slave” has baggage which “bus” does not. There isn’t a call to rename the mouse because the name isn’t inextricably linked to a horrible part of history.

As for the cost of switching, one nice benefit to using more accurate terms is that they’re already familiar - if you swap “slave” for “worker” or “replica”, nobody is going to need extensive retraining to adjust.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by neatze on Monday July 13, 2020 @08:24AM (#23819967)
Just out of curiosity, is chess master gives also bad connotations ?

Do chess pieces color seem racial to you ?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by acdha on Monday July 13, 2020 @08:58AM (#23820266)
No, because the white and black pieces are exactly the same. This is unlike whitelist/blacklist where you’re specifying a preference where white is desirable and black is not.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by neatze on Monday July 13, 2020 @09:10AM (#23820351)
They are not same, white moves first, and first move is an advantage in a chess game.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by Hamuko on Monday July 13, 2020 @12:10AM (#23817084)
What historical baggage does whitelist/blacklist have?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by acdha on Monday July 13, 2020 @09:00AM (#23820281)
white = good black = bad

Does that seem like a great association to defend when it can trivially be changed with no confusion or loss of meaning?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by dmingod666 on Monday July 13, 2020 @05:22PM (#23825720)
Light = white Darkness = black
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by tomp on Monday July 13, 2020 @05:21PM (#23825713)
Educate yourself please. This narrow worldview is disingenuous and does you no Good.

Black is positive in finance.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Merge tag 'inclusive-terminology' into Linux kernel by acdha on Monday July 13, 2020 @08:39PM (#23827340)
You should read my comment more carefully: I was specifically referring to the whitelist / blacklist usage where there is no common usage reversing the relationship of the terms. I have no objection to finance using it because it’s positive and doesn’t resemble past racist usage.
[ Parent | on HN ]