991–1000 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I support it and I don’t work for google. I like this feature that encourages more empathy in this strife and hate filled world.
So Google execs now decides how we speak… brave new world. You like it until it corrects you for not being woke enough
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I support it and I don’t work for google. I like this feature that encourages more empathy in this strife and hate filled world.
Serious question: in what way do you feel that Google suggesting alterations to the specific language used in the article (words like motherboard or fierce) is helping people be more empathetic? I'm putting aside intentionally and just curious about how this actually encourages empathy?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who somewhat supports public land ownership (of the Georgism variety), I think you'd have to be plain nuts to use that belief to justify discouraging others to use the word 'landlord'. Especially considering I hear the word more from people who oppose land ownership than from anyone else. I'm more inclined to believe that this is about gender.
Exactly. One won't eliminate the concept by eliminating the word to describe the concept.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
whitelist and blacklist are lazy language, even if you ignore the fact that you personally are not bothered by them and you don't have the mental capacity to understand why someone else might be. They carry no intrinsic meaning, and if you can't come up with more descriptive language you are the problem. In all cases you can come up with a better word - include, deny, allow, block, ban, accept, etc. It all depends on…
Nobody was bothered by these words until some jackass told them they should be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>However, the net result is that words are driven out of the language even if everyone involved in the document wouldn't care. No one uses "fuck" in corporate communication either. Is anyone worried about that word being "driven out of the language"? I don't think corporate speech is as influential in overall language use as you are implying.
> No one uses "fuck" in corporate communication either. Swear words are specifically used to be provocative, so naturally they're not going to disappear. Words like "motherboard" or "whitelist" were historically neutral and primarily used in professional settings, so removal from corporate speech is correspondingly a much bigger factor. To be clear, I'm not particularly worried or concerned about this. I don't consid…
It's like, of _course_ early peoples created concepts from "day, when it's light" and "night, when it's dark". It has nothing to do with skin colour or ethnicity at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> needlessly gendered term that perpetuates stereotypes. The stereotype that mothers... are... computer parts...? I don't get it, what's the stereotype?
The stereotype that mothers or women are the source or backbone. Women can play both active and supporting roles. Both mothers and fathers can play these role, even sometimes children. Really there’s no reason to use parental language like this which may offend people who struggle with fertility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you read the article, it is clear who their prospective clients are. Big corporations pretending not to be racist. The next iteration will be a corporate-speak translator. As annoying as a woke clippy might be, at times I realize that we're lucky we don't live in a racist clippy alt reality. "Would you like to expand all mentions of "n-word"?"
> I realize that we're lucky we don't live in a racist clippy alt reality If someone is being racist, wouldn't we arguably be better off if they used language that made it transparent to the reader-- rather than disguised it with the magic of search and replace? Real prejudice can't be erased by search and replace but it can be made more plausibly deniable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Main is better. Master/slave has uncomfortable connotations. This one isn't a big deal.
Where is the slave in git?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is an analogy to slavery a bad thing? Such that even references to the concept need to banned The Partition of India was a horrific tragedy and killed 2 million people. Does this mean we should do away with partition_sort ?
I mean it isn't killing people, but it is admittedly strange. How about if instead you use Dominatrix and Sub? Or Officer and Prisoner? Would those not be inappropriate because it's just borrowing terminology? There are only a few of these progressive changes I find really valid, but this is one I can understand. It's not that it's killing people, it's just if we can change it then why not. It is kind of weird to use…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is an analogy to slavery a bad thing? Such that even references to the concept need to banned The Partition of India was a horrific tragedy and killed 2 million people. Does this mean we should do away with partition_sort ?
Partition_sort isn't an analogy to the Partition of India (which isn't the traditionally understood meaning of the word 'partition'). In terms of analogies, we're much closer to if we'd decided to call a "delete all" function the "genocide" function. If computer programmers had widely used that terminology for the last three decades it might sound a bit less weird to us and the cohort of people shouting "that's such…