It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.
I’ll keep using master/slave. Political correctness bullshit be damned.
Or child/parent
even better, top/bottom
Funny how people get heated over things that don’t matter. OK, it has been one way for a long time. But had it been Parent/Child the same amount of time, would it be any different?
As long as you know the meanings of what is used, it doesn’t matter what they are. If someone would rather not use master/slave, let them. No one is stopping you from making a choice to keep using it. You also might have to interact with consequences for that choice, but that’s what you get for working with other people. 🫠
Aren’t IDE drives basically the only thing that used the master/slave terminology?
I’m not sure we even need that terminology at this point… I knew it from hard drives but I’m either 1) dealing with way more than two drives, or 2) using Linux which I don’t even think of as a master/slave so much as a fuck-you-mount-me-or-not-I-don’t-care partitions.
I’m not really sure where else it’s used, especially since everything else seems to just be primary/secondary. But I’m no CS major so IDK.
If anyone is offended by this CS term - you are a certified soyflake.
daddy/kitten
My user name on all my PC’s(non root) is literally Master, my PC’s are all Slave, slave1, slave2. I will fight to keep them that way. I am also extremely anti slavery for sentient creatures. Words matter in the context of their intent. Dumbing down of the language by forcing alternate uses of a word to mean something other than its obvious intended use is evidence of dilusional minds. Pure and simple, they don’t deserve a seat at the table.
*delusional
Spelling is bulshit.
*bullshit
It’s not their fault, they’ve all got the mispeling vyrus.
No. Di-lusional, opposite of mono-lusional.
I will fight to keep them that way.
No one gives a shit what you call your PCs. They’re not rounding up a posse to come and forcefully rename them. Just take a breath.
And while you’re unbarricading the door the rest of the world will be moving on.
Weird hill to die on. Language changes. Some people think it’s how new ideas are not only shared but how they’re formed. You might be interested in Latin.
I’m a developer. I use main/release/dev for new projects, because it just sounds better and more intuitive to me honestly. Old projects don’t get relabeled, they stay master. That’s my two cents.
I look at “master” in our repo like you would refer to a master recording or a remaster, or similarly the gold master for when you could say a video game has gone gold.
That’s why they used master. And this makes the whole “master is a bad word” stupid, at least in Git context.
I don’t know what a master recording is. Googled it and it seems to be related to vinyl or something. So yeah, kind of hard for me to wrap my head around that, but definitely an interesting outlook.
the master is the recording, all other recordings stem from
Master can also mean proficiency. If you say you’ve mastered a trade it doesn’t mean you enslaved the trade, you simply have complete knowledge of the trade.
So in that context, the master branch is the complete branch. The branch that other branches stem from because it’s the one with code from all the teams. You could branch from another team member’s branch but if that branch hasn’t merged from master in a while, it won’t have all the knowledge (code). When you merge in master you’re getting knowledge from elsewhere from the branch that’s aware of more things than your branch is: the branch that has mastery of the code, the master branch.
That’s not how the terms entered computing though. We always used master in opposition of one or multiple slaves. It implies that one component has control and orders the other one around.
So in a git commit (since they mentioned branches)… What’s the slave? Since your the one gatekeeping the word you should know right? How come Git can’t be Master in the context they provided when there is no existence of a slave commit?
I’m not sure where you’re going with this. I haven’t gatekept anything, you can use whatever term you want, that’s none of my business. You can happily read my other comment. To me, “master” makes no sense if there are no “slaves”. That’s why I don’t use it. It doesn’t make sense to use it. You do you, that’s your business.
https://mastering.com/how-to-master-a-song/
To master something, has a number of meanings that don’t require the use of “slaves”.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/master
Definitions most definitions of the word have nothing to do with slaves.
Edit: In this case, I believe that we all treat Git the same as this definition in specific…
: to produce a master recording of (something, such as a musical rendition)
So just because you only know of “master” in regards to “slaves”… that doesn’t make you right.
Never said it made me right. Just didn’t make sense to me. You can still use whatever you like, as I do.
That’s not how the terms entered computing though. We always used master in opposition of one or multiple slaves.
And yet you said this… Acting like you speak for the entirety of industry, when I bring up one specific facet of our industry that isn’t using the term juxtaposition to “slaves”… but rather to other concepts of “master”, you now magically change your tune.
Did you know that most people are not developers, and for many other use cases “master” does in fact imply control?
We’re talking about computing here. At least the post does. I guess you could be a QA engineer or something else, but this discussion is mostly a thing with developers.
Same for databases, master / slave does not really describe the relationship anymore. It’s a primary, secondary, control node, read only or something else.
We renamed everything to keep shared pipelines working with one branch.
That’s where you should use something more like top / bottom /s
I think in this sense, master is more akin to the ‘recording’ master - The best version of the recording to which others are generated, and all parts merged; no ‘slaves’ necessarily just the ‘master’.
I think that’s because in computer science most master/slave nomenclature comes from hardware with a command/control structure (still notable in things like Spark where the namenode/master node controls the data nodes).
GIT just took naming conventions from other existing design patterns (although I should probably look up sources to verify that assumption).
I’ve switched over to using primary/replica for database stuff because it’s more accurate. The replicas don’t always behave themselves so calling them “slaves” implies a level of obedience to the “master” that they don’t have.
Token Ring barely avoids copyright/trademark litigation.
Daisy Chain fits with Dom/Sub.
Or we could go full millenial reddit with Bull/Cuck
Or full MAGA with Man/Woman
It only sounds bad to the fringest of the fringe that’s deceivingly loud on twitter. Good luck trying to find even one real person thinking those terms should be changed. This kind of stuff is why people vote for Trump.
The i2c spec–which is officially controlled by NXP–explicitly made the change in 2021:
https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/user-guide/UM10204.pdf
Updated the terms “master/slave” to “controller/target” throughout to align with MIPI I3C specification and NXP’s Inclusive Language Project
Yes, this has gotten real traction.
It was changed a while ago, it’s primary and secondary now. It’s been that way for a decade+ at this point.
Not every domain though. I still see master/slave in every relevant datasheets that I read, and I’ve never seen primary/secondary in newer datasheets.
That’s interesting, because everything I run into now has primary/secondary or main and secondary. I’ve not seen master and slave for a good 5 years now, sure older stuff still carries it but most that new has swapped over.
The place I’m at changed all of its documentation to student/teacher instead of master/slave.
… I question their relationship with their teachers of they think those are equivalent.
I’d like it to be changed because I don’t like saying "is the slave working? Did you check? To my black employees.
To be honest I’d feel stupid saying that alout at anyone. They’re not called that in my native language - I think.
But you’re depriving the black employers of the chance to say it to their white employees!
Maybe its just the way you say it.
I say it with a hard R
Harder R if you want the SlaveR to whip the SlaveE :'D
Also just kidding. I really really dont understand a lot of the sensitivity and sentiment against words. Words are NOT Violence as long as you agree to be civil and not militant.
It’s not obvious to realize this, but the luxury of thinking words are neutral is a privilege.
Think of it this way. If 5% of the time, when a person said “howdy”, they punched you in the face. You would be very wary of anyone saying howdy. Just in case. Now imagine having to live on edge like that 24/7. It wears you down. It’s exhausting.
Well, it costs me nothing to choose a different word besides howdy. And for that cost of $0 I can make someone else’s life less anxious. I know how much anxiety sucks because I’m basically made out of it. So I’m going to do what I can to put other people at ease.
Now obviously black people know that the IT term master and slave are not about them. But they are also conditioned by society that, some small % of the time when those words come up, things go very poorly for them. So yeah, I would be twitchy about it too. Even if my rational mind knew it was silly.
There is real, actual, injustice in the world that we need to address. Computer terms are not one of them.
But if I have the power to make a small change at work to both be more accurate and correct a minor injustice, why the heck not?! I can’t fix world hunger, but I can at least start a discussion about changing some internal terminology
I think very few people mind changing it, and a few people want it changed, so it’s slowly shifting across various use cases. I’ve only discussed the change from master/slave terminology with one person that affirmatively supported the change, and they didn’t know that there’s still slavery in the world today.
I don’t know what to make of that, other than to say ending human slavery ought to be a higher priority than ending references to it.
I think very few people mind changing it
I doubt that. Do you know how many system configurations depend on these keywords? Do you have any idea how many hours of work and system outages this would cause?
We had one guy at work like this. He was laughed out of the meeting.
no please stop, i’m so tired of googling kinky stuff, seeing a spicy looking result and opening it just to see some computer server stuff pick something else idk maybe capitalist & worker, bonus points for political commentary
Stop discriminating then, see the sexiness in the servers, the horniness in the harddrive.
i already do, dronification kink represent, but at least make those search results spicier in their content!
After all why call it a hard drive if it doesn’t make you hard
Agreed lol. this opinion also works for the god-awfully named “gimp”
The world famous Gnu Image Manipulation Program?
A long time ago, in a job not so far away, I worked on a computer project where we were using Apache Jackrabbit.
I quickly learned that I needed to search for Apache Jackrabbit and not just Jackrabbit – vibrators weren’t relevant to the project.
For IDE drives, Master/Slave is both correct and describes properly the functionality.
Only one device can talk on an IDE channel at a time (one IDE ribbon cable is one channel). The Slave Drive requires the Master drive to be able to connect to the controller. If there is only one drive, it must be designated the Master drive.
We don’t share multiple devices on a single channel anymore - SATA, PCI-E, these techs have only one device per channel (or only a certain number of channels dedicated per device).
The old Master/Slave system was a hack to get double the IDE devices connected per controller channel.
