As a black person, I find this to be pretty racist. The idea that this will appease blacks or is wanted by us is deeply insulting.
How disconnected from black experience can you be that you think this is important or desirable?
It trivializes our very important concerns about police brutality and systematic racism. Do you want to fight against slavery? Then lets campaign to abolish the exception in the 13th amendment.
> As a black person, I find this to be pretty racist. The idea that this will appease blacks or is wanted by us is deeply insulting.
White-dominated society deciding to stop casually reinforcing racist ideology and trying to figure out how to do that isn't about appeasing blacks or appealing to them on the level of atomic steps (I suppose the end goal of a society with less pervasive racism is something that probably appeals to most blacks—it certainly does to me personally, but I wasn't elected to speak for the whole race.)
> How disconnected from black experience can you be that you think this is important or desirable?
I think it's pretty racist for you to declare that my experience must not be black enough, as I find it not terribly important in and of itself or, out of context, desirable, but a part of a direction which is both important and desirable.
> It trivializes our very important concerns about police brutality and systematic racism.
I disagree that it does, and I think claiming that it does requires adopting a fallacious line of thought of the pattern “Doing X at all implies that doing X is all that is necessary or desirable”. Were I to adopt such a pattern, I would say that this:
> Do you want to fight against slavery? Then lets campaign to abolish the exception in the 13th amendment.
...likewise trivializes our very important concerns about police brutality and systematic racism, because while historically centrally important in the formation of racist structures in our modern society and economy, actual de jure penal involuntary servitude in the hole created by the 13th Amendment exception is a small and decreasing part of that in the present.
But that's silly, because attacking the 13th Amendment hole doesn't mean not attacking all the other problems.
I get your point, but the Open Source Hardware Association probably does not have much influence over more important issues.
I don't think this is so much of them saying "look at us we fixed it!" as much as it is them saying "we're taking responsibility for the domain over which we have power".
Seems more like a cheap, public religious exorcism; "thoughts and prayers"
"Would you like to save the world from the degradation and destruction it seems destined for? Then step away from shallow mass movements and quietly go to work on your own self-awareness. If you want to awaken all of humanity, then awaken all of yourself. If you want to eliminate the suffering in the world, then eliminate all that is dark and negative in yourself. Truly, the greatest gift you have to give is that of your own self-transformation."
These are people who will do anything to destroy you. Question whether an SPI pin name is oppressive and risk having your career destroyed. It's not a matter of social progress, it's about seizing power and using any tool to do it.
I think that's the breakthrough I had in realizing whether it's worth arguing against the woke-mob. They don't care about arguments, they don't even have one.
Renaming a pin isn't seizing power - it's exercising power that's already been taken or at least trying to be established, i.e. calling anyone who dares to question actions, movements, etc. a racist and destroying their livelihood. The power is through co-opting race issues, and other marginalized identities to silence debate and free thought. Oddly enough it's usually done by the managerial, urbane, upper-middle class white crowd.
If we spent our time changing specs every time someone somewhere gets offended by something that didn't even happen to their generation, we will be spending all our time doing only this.
So ? I know there is still slavery. There are still people who die, should I stop using the phrase "the server is dead" because I might offend you since you lost your grandma ?
While there has been so many pushes like this to remove the words of slavery from our consciousness, it's important to be conscious of the fact that there are more people living in slavery right now than ever before in history.
Well that’s interesting, but could easily be do to an explosion of population. Anyone have historical per capita numbers? They seem to be hard to find.
Difficult to find such data, but population explosion surely helped scale up the absolute numbers.
Nevertheless, a lower rate of slavery per capita should still not suffice as a satisfactory excuse for us to ignore the uncomfortable present realities of the tens of millions of people currently living as slaves.
As a thought experiment, if using the term "slave" is prohibitively offensive in a computer program (even if the reference is only conceptual and doesn't have anything to do with human slavery--as anyone with half a brain knows), what is supposed to happen in the event that a program, or some "casual" text actually does need to refer to actual human slavery? Is it a topic that can no longer be put to words, because the words are offensive? For example, what if I wrote a computer program to do some sort of analysis on historical slavery data. Is it acceptable or not to name a variable "slaves?" Do I have to rename it "disadvantagedPersonsThanksBLM" ?
Would the reasoning be "conceptual slavery cannot be expressed in such a way, but real slavery is permissible to express" ?
What's next, "leader?" Maybe red-black trees have to be renamed? Integration tests? Maybe we have to switch default terminal colors to pink-purple to satisfy the definitely-not-fascists?
I think proponents of this change would say that talking about slavery is the perfect time to use the word "slavery". This is about an organization deciding to stop using the word for something that is not slavery.
I would say that both "slaves" and "disadvantagedPersonsThanksBLM" are likely both inappropriate variable names for your program. You should probably pick something that is more descriptive of the function.
"our community has gone this long without acknowledging the need to treat all humans with respect."
Wait is that what we weren't doing by using the terms "slave" in a different context than anything resembling the actual slave trade? Come on now, we're all adults here. Have some respect for our own autonomy of thought.
Also, great job calling out all those companies who haven't given in to your ludicrous demands. That'll get the PR people there so scared they won't have a choice but to do what you say.
I would like to know if those who effectively are slaves now, would approve of this. It looks like doing something to feel good without checking whether it actually does any good.
Readit News
How disconnected from black experience can you be that you think this is important or desirable?
It trivializes our very important concerns about police brutality and systematic racism. Do you want to fight against slavery? Then lets campaign to abolish the exception in the 13th amendment.
White-dominated society deciding to stop casually reinforcing racist ideology and trying to figure out how to do that isn't about appeasing blacks or appealing to them on the level of atomic steps (I suppose the end goal of a society with less pervasive racism is something that probably appeals to most blacks—it certainly does to me personally, but I wasn't elected to speak for the whole race.)
> How disconnected from black experience can you be that you think this is important or desirable?
I think it's pretty racist for you to declare that my experience must not be black enough, as I find it not terribly important in and of itself or, out of context, desirable, but a part of a direction which is both important and desirable.
> It trivializes our very important concerns about police brutality and systematic racism.
I disagree that it does, and I think claiming that it does requires adopting a fallacious line of thought of the pattern “Doing X at all implies that doing X is all that is necessary or desirable”. Were I to adopt such a pattern, I would say that this:
> Do you want to fight against slavery? Then lets campaign to abolish the exception in the 13th amendment.
...likewise trivializes our very important concerns about police brutality and systematic racism, because while historically centrally important in the formation of racist structures in our modern society and economy, actual de jure penal involuntary servitude in the hole created by the 13th Amendment exception is a small and decreasing part of that in the present.
But that's silly, because attacking the 13th Amendment hole doesn't mean not attacking all the other problems.
I don't think this is so much of them saying "look at us we fixed it!" as much as it is them saying "we're taking responsibility for the domain over which we have power".
"Would you like to save the world from the degradation and destruction it seems destined for? Then step away from shallow mass movements and quietly go to work on your own self-awareness. If you want to awaken all of humanity, then awaken all of yourself. If you want to eliminate the suffering in the world, then eliminate all that is dark and negative in yourself. Truly, the greatest gift you have to give is that of your own self-transformation."
-Lao Tzu
I think that's the breakthrough I had in realizing whether it's worth arguing against the woke-mob. They don't care about arguments, they don't even have one.
Deleted Comment
Nevertheless, a lower rate of slavery per capita should still not suffice as a satisfactory excuse for us to ignore the uncomfortable present realities of the tens of millions of people currently living as slaves.
As a thought experiment, if using the term "slave" is prohibitively offensive in a computer program (even if the reference is only conceptual and doesn't have anything to do with human slavery--as anyone with half a brain knows), what is supposed to happen in the event that a program, or some "casual" text actually does need to refer to actual human slavery? Is it a topic that can no longer be put to words, because the words are offensive? For example, what if I wrote a computer program to do some sort of analysis on historical slavery data. Is it acceptable or not to name a variable "slaves?" Do I have to rename it "disadvantagedPersonsThanksBLM" ?
Would the reasoning be "conceptual slavery cannot be expressed in such a way, but real slavery is permissible to express" ?
What's next, "leader?" Maybe red-black trees have to be renamed? Integration tests? Maybe we have to switch default terminal colors to pink-purple to satisfy the definitely-not-fascists?
I would say that both "slaves" and "disadvantagedPersonsThanksBLM" are likely both inappropriate variable names for your program. You should probably pick something that is more descriptive of the function.
https://www.oshwa.org/a-resolution-to-redefine-spi-signal-na...
Wait is that what we weren't doing by using the terms "slave" in a different context than anything resembling the actual slave trade? Come on now, we're all adults here. Have some respect for our own autonomy of thought.
Also, great job calling out all those companies who haven't given in to your ludicrous demands. That'll get the PR people there so scared they won't have a choice but to do what you say.