Today I read a blog post by a member of my community about the use of master/slave terminology,
Others have commented on this as well,
and its been removed from many programming languages and systems already. A quick google search turns up many examples.
Several years ago, I removed this terminology from from my courses at the college I work at, but I link to Arduino's website as a reference. Unfortunately, Arduino continues to use this problematic terminology.
I noted that Adafruit has adopted alternative language that preserves the existing acronyms,
I use primary/secondary in my labs. But either way, I would ask Arduino to consider adopting new language on the English version of its website.
Iām donāt think I understand the usefulness of changing the terminology, when the spi peripheral in FACT remains exactly a āslaveā, completely under the control of the micro and unable to do so much as shift a bit on its own.
The terms host and peripheral has been used for a long time of other protocols such as USB. An advantage to this (not my idea but I like it) is the SPI acronyms become HOPI and HIPO.
The point about "master and slave" is that it clearly defines which one is in charge and which one is subservient. And in a programming environment those roles can change - the slave can become the master and the master the slave.
The word "peripheral" means something that is away from the main unit. It does not imply subservience in either direction. And it would make a nonsense of the normal usage of the word "peripheral" to interchange the words "host" and "peripheral". Imagine bringing the "peripherique" into the centre of Paris.
IMHO keeping the usage of "master and slave" for engineering and programming purposes helps to remind us how inappropriate it is to treat humans like that.
Robin2:
IMHO keeping the usage of "master and slave" for engineering and programming purposes helps to remind us how inappropriate it is to treat humans like that.
+1.
I would agree with initiatives to stop using "whitelist" and "blacklist" due to stigma and racial stereotyping surrounding the two terms: the terminology only makes sense if you equate 'white' with 'good, permitted, safe' and black with 'bad, dangerous, forbidden'... I think that's clearly loaded and thus inappropriate.
But there is no need to push beyond what's really needed. Master and Slave are well defined words and using them when it describes a situation in a relevant way makes sense. Why would we considering removing them from the vocabulary? I'm not sure I get it but I read it can hurt feelings....
Research has shown that the use of the word āslaveā evokes strong feelings of degradation and human rights issues. It carries with it the association to the brutal and dehumanizing institution of slavery. Even though in the usage of the term for electronic circuits there is no implied offense, the term harbors racist views. It evokes images of times past and by continuing the use of the language today, it gives credence to the idea that it is okay to continue such relationships; therefore it still has power. To that end, I envision nothing but a positive effect in the industry if the term is eliminated
I've not seen the research and its context though and if it applies to electronics... Should we start making all processes now fully collaborative and super polite, can't do anymore "DO THIS NOW" type of commands and add code just to ask a IC to "Do this ā please, when you have time and without willing to be bossy. thanks".... I don't think so...
Now that being said, I don't loose anything if the vocabulary is removed and if it makes people feel happy, thus I don't have massive strong feelings against this either. I'm just unconvinced it's ''harboring racist views''.
Thank you everyone. This is a hot debate. As far as I see here and in other communities, some people are sensitive to the issue while others are more skeptical about the usefulness, but almost nobody is against it. Let's keep the discussion going; I'd like to hear more from other people in the Arduino community. Inclusivity and diversity have always been core values of Arduino, much beyond words
I am against it too. What I am a saying is that if there is a democratic decision made about this, Iām not going to go dark and in resistance. It wonāt kill me.
I just will disagree as I donāt see the fundamentals.
If you can come up with the same type of clear connotation as blacklist I mentioned above then Iām willing to listen to your arguments
And I happen to agree with some of the more explanatory posts.
Not I only sub to SD to get to the links for the main topics which are often not as good as they once were but hey we can't win them all.
Pagus:
Sometimes the world changes even if you do not want it to.
Maybe. It does not mean there is an improvement.
The "N" word has been almost completely excised from the vocabulary for some years now but the need for the "Black Lives Matter" campaign shows quite clearly that changing the language has not changed people's attitudes. IMHO it would have been far better to have kept the word in common usage so we could easily identify the bigots.
Sure remove all the words you want and leave us as a monosyllabic world.
It looks good on paper and scores lots of brownie points for those who do it but that's all it is.
It is just a "look good" move and has very little merit in reality.
It will not remove the racists, bigots, fascists, misogynists etc etc etc. they will always be there so long as you have people that perpetuate those things such as certain politicians and side groups.
Are they going to re-print all the millions of books that contain any of the supposed nasty words ?
Will they have to re-write all the history books ?
They are only nasty words by the way if you use them in the wrong context.
Otherwise they have been around much longer than before they became "prohibited" words.
It to me is simple a knee jerk reaction to the current climate that has no real merit and simply pampers to the politically correct brigade who are just one up from grammar police.
