Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #267789

Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP

From Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl>
Newsgroups linux.debian.user
Subject Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP
Date 2024-02-24 21:50 +0100
Message-ID <Ib785-cnCt-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <IaI9H-c7Zz-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <IaIW5-c8fZ-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <IaYo9-ciou-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <IaYxP-cirx-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <Ib0zD-cjD6-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization Devrandom.pl

Show all headers | View raw

Dnia 2024-02-24, o godz. 14:42:39
Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> napisał(a):

> jeremy ardley wrote:
> 
> >> But what about the black market? Or does in fact "block
> >> market" work just fine?  
> >
> > The term "black market" is from World War II - i.e. 1939-45.
> > It has nothing to do with slaves. It means transactions in
> > the dark, not visible,  not official.  
> 
> I think the reason is black people shouldn't be associated
> with everything negative that is black in language.

They are not associated with everything negative. The people that want
those changed just assume that people think that. I assure you normal
people don't see the word "black" attached to something and
automatically think it means something about the people. 

People wanting to change common unoffensive terms just assume everyone
else *must* be racist so they play the pretend game and imagine that if
their idealized proxy for minority that they imagined in their heads
would get offended that it needs to be changed

One of recent (and also not so recent as similar thing was tried few 
decades before with same character) examples of that was when some
activists decided "surely Speedy Gonzales stereotypica presentation 
of Mexicans is racist, lets remove it". 

Someone imagined people portrayed might be offended, decided to not 
ask anyone (or as the single person offended they could find in hundreds)
in actual demographics, then remove it. Then the activists patted 
themselves on the back after doing the good in the world.

Then the minority told them to sod off and bring it back because thats
the opposite of what they wanted and all they ended up doing is pissing
off or wasting time of everyone involved

As for that particular phrase I'm guessing black market came from being
under cover of darkness, underground or otherwise secluded area, but
I'm no etymologist. People just like short descriptive terms and dont 
care much about source of words.

Slave kinda came from that too; in many hardware setups it does
actually means "the device's every action is directed by master" and
not just "a replica or a secondary node", like for example in SPI or
I2C protocol the master is only one putting read/write commands on the
bus and slave device just respons to orders. You could maybe replace it
with thrall but I'm sure someone would be offended on behalf of someone
else by that too somehow...

-- 
Mariusz Gronczewski (XANi) <xani666@gmail.com>
GnuPG: 0xEA8ACE64
https://devrandom.eu

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-22 11:40 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 07:10 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 10:50 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-23 11:00 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP tomas@tuxteam.de - 2024-02-23 11:20 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 12:20 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 11:30 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-23 19:30 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> - 2024-03-14 19:30 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 01:50 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-03-15 09:50 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> - 2024-03-15 17:10 +0100
              Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-03-15 17:20 +0100
              Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 17:40 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 17:30 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Will Mengarini <seldon@eskimo.com> - 2024-03-15 19:20 +0100
            Please terminate this faecal matter - the whole thread appears to be  a troll.....Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-03-15 20:00 +0100
              Re: Please terminate this faecal matter - the whole thread appears to  be a troll.....Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for  network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-03-15 23:30 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 21:50 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Arno Lehmann <al@its-lehmann.de> - 2024-02-23 12:50 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 13:20 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 13:40 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 23:30 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> - 2024-02-25 00:20 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-25 07:30 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 08:40 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 12:50 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 15:50 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Roger Price <roger@rogerprice.org> - 2024-02-23 11:50 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 12:20 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 15:40 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-23 17:30 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2024-02-23 19:10 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Gremlin <scott-andrews@columbus.rr.com> - 2024-02-23 19:20 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-23 21:00 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 20:00 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-02-24 12:30 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP jeremy ardley <jeremy.ardley@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 12:40 +0100
              Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-02-24 14:50 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2024-02-24 15:10 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-02-24 18:00 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-24 19:40 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 23:20 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-25 07:20 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 08:40 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP tomas@tuxteam.de - 2024-02-25 10:30 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> - 2024-02-25 10:40 +0100
                Reply to list vs. group reply [was: Inlclusive terminology...] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-25 10:50 +0100
                Re: Reply to list vs. group reply [was: Inlclusive terminology...] Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> - 2024-02-25 13:20 +0100
                Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-24 22:40 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 01:50 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 12:10 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-02-25 12:30 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 13:00 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 02:00 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-14 18:00 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-24 21:50 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-25 00:30 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 00:50 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 12:40 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-23 21:20 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 15:50 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP fxkl47BF@protonmail.com - 2024-02-23 16:00 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 18:20 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 21:20 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-23 21:50 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 22:20 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 03:40 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-24 04:00 +0100
              Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 23:20 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-24 23:30 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 18:20 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-23 21:30 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2024-02-23 22:40 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-23 20:40 +0100

csiph-web