I honestly hate how america centric internet has become. Seems like every context is considered from american culture even though there are 7 billion more people on the planet.
The rest of the world doesn’t really care about your internal politics. Don’t change international standards because of some cultural issues in your home.
Also human trafficking is real world slavery that enslaves more people in a single year than in entire history of american slavery. How about we start from there and get rid of the word traffic?
Github is an American company acquired by Microsoft which is an American company. Feel free to name your branches whatever is appropriate to your cultural context
Just because it’s incorporated and registered in america make it an american company? That’s not how internet works. If you have international community you should respect it as an international body.
You’re kinda the problem I mentioned in my OP: “Everything is american! hur dur” ugh 🤮Literally that’s exactly what this means. Company incorporated in country X is a country X company. Why are you so upset that they’ve made this semantic decision which will likely barely affect you?
I honestly hate how america centric internet has become. Seems like every context is considered from american culture even though there are 7 billion more people on the planet.
nah, you’re just browsing the wrongs parts of the internet if you’ve gotten such impression :)
Show me the right parts!
they’re not in english :)
That might not matter. Language is not always a barrier.
And anyway, there is a kit you can learn from people you don’t understand.
I know you Microsoft, I know this is just a PR move and you won’t do anything else to challenge racism (considering all the power you have).
It’s a good move, but I know that coming from Microsoft is not sincere.
Exactly. Big companies talk about huge issues like this but rarely actually do anything meaningful. Imagine if they used same effort they used to lobby against privacy laws to lobby for better protections against discrimination.
My opinion? Meaningless token action, basically a PR stunt. If they actually want to fight racism, this energy would have been better spent on more useful ways of doing it.
On the other hand, this doesnt have any negative consequences. In the worst case, it will do nothing but piss off right-wingers, and then it would still be worth the effort for me.
Assuming this is intended to be a publicity stunt, my biggest problem with this is that they’re using a massive issue like racism as essentially a marketing tool. IMO this waters down the importance of the issue and is all around disrespectful.
Who is “they”?
The GitHub team or the Microsoft exec who ordered this.
True, Github needs to stop working with ICE before they do anything else.
deleted by creator
IMO it’s an american thing. The society there is obsessed with race.
No matter what the issue is, somehow somebody will make a connection with race. It’s really striking once you listen to enough conversation from there.
The word master has a lot of meanings, but one of them has racial connotations, in a context unrelated to git branches.
virtue signaling
What’s next? Master/slave replicas should also be renamed, right? What about client/server? Black/white-listing? This is really dumb
Actually, black/whiteliste was one of the cases where i didn’t notice the negative connotation before, but it is obviously true. the subtle negative connotation leads to stigmatization. So i like it.
i think client/server is fine, it doesn’t have a colonial connotation.
Is this really a good way to move forward? Rename everything and pretend like it did not happen? It feels like this kind of approach is just hiding things under the carpet. Renaming things that may have negative connotations due to a troubled history is too extreme form of censorship (similar to book burning) and a bit lazy IMHO.
All these technical terms are very descriptive of the concepts they abstract, (eg. it could be argued that black/white-listing is in relation to physical light and how it reflects off white and gets absorbed by black).
Disclaimer: I am culturally very far away from the colonial history so I may be a bit biased when I say renaming things like that is just dumb.
I dont get this “pretend it didn’t happen” thing people like to push these kinds of changes as, because they are actively admitting that bad things did happen and they would like to avoid associating themselves and normalizing the idea of something as horrible as slavery and instead use objectively clearer and language and terms less rooted in historical trauma.
Blacklist/whitelist is objectively a less accurate term than blocklist/allowlist.
-
There exist alternatives that also are very descriptive of the concepts they abstract
-
the point is not to pretend it did not happen, it is to avoid the subtle negative connotation. When one has no experience with black people but works a lot in tech, the term “blacklist” will form the opinion and behavior regarding black people. This person will think it is more likely, black people do negative things like robbery, etc.
-
the person alice hasters who has written at length on this topic germany cites one example, where she was on a market and wanted to look at stuff to buy, but the selling person thought alice intended to rob him. So he shouted alice should go away. When alice said she was interested to buy things and even has a white person besides her to “prove” that she was not intended to rob him, he was fine with it. But he didn’t even excuse himself for this language. Such things are more likely when terms like whitelist is used for positive things and blacklist is used for negative things. Because the color black is not inherently bad, so why is a blacklist bad?
-
I also suggest to read the draft: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html where these things are explained.
And i also suggest to not describe things as dumb when you already know that you are culturally far away from colonial history.
for black people, colonial history is still very important to understand
As for the anecdote in your third bullet point: instead of renaming black/white-list terms to something else, what if we actually educate that shop owner about racism and why it is idiotic and evil to discriminate against a person because of their skin color?
- it doesn’t work, usually. When you go to people and call them racist, they will go defensive. Very few people actually think about this and try to find out what was racist and how they could improve. This is the experience of many marginalized groups, be it people who suffer sexism, racism, ableism, etc.
So because racism and being racist is rather severe, people usually refuse to acknowledge it, the first time. So a common response when people are confronted about a subtle racist stereotype is to say that they have a black friend or had a black girlfriend, and therefore can’t be racist. So they understand the “hey, you are here a little racist” as “hey, you’re racist, nazi”. They don’t see that racism can be subtle.
- the point i’m trying to make is that racism is much more widespread than people usually believe. This is one of the thousand examples black people have to prove such things. So of course, we should work on that as a society and educate that. And one way of educating that is to provoke a public discussion about such terms as blackness/whiteness, maybe we slowly get to the point where the majority of the society listens and believes black experiences (which we currently don’t, mostly). And the other important point is to remove the subtle association of “black/dark = bad” which a blacklist has. So the idea is to especially educate further tech-generations.
I concede to your second point, and I am starting to see why black/white-list can be a sensitive term and just trying to change the connotation like I suggested somewhere above is not tractable.
I still think that education is key. Not going outright and calling people racist, that is counterproductive I wholeheartedly agree. But instilling in them from a younger age the evil of racism instead.
-
This is some really dumb shit. This use of “master” has nothing to do with slavery. Practically all uses of “master” have nothing to do with it. But let’s just break all kinds of scripts anyways, for a fucking PR stunt.
Wait but the words master and slave have meaning, don’t they?
