[R] [SPAM] Re: The "--slave" option

[Benjamin Lang]

Hi Richard,

Sure, it's a silly example, but it makes about as much sense as using
"slave" to mean "quiet". Also, there is no "--master" option so it's not
exactly the master/slave terminology here either.

My only point is that I think it's very distasteful to give such a
needlessly awful name to an option in what has become a very broadly used
piece of software. It would be good to update it, I think.

If anyone knows how to actually pass this on to the R
developers/contributors, please let me know.

Thanks,
Ben

On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 05:14, Richard O'Keefe <raoknz using gmail.com> wrote:

> Nobody would use "stentorian" as an alternative to "verbose" because they
> mean very different things.
>   "verbose" means "using many words"
>   "stentorian" means "talking very loudly, like Stentor, whose voice was
> as powerful
>                       as fifty voices of other men".
> You can be verbose while talking in a whisper.
> You can be stentorian while being laconic.
>
> If you don't like the word "slave", the option "--silent" is there for you
> to use.
>
> The "master-slave" design pattern is in hundreds of books (although I note
> that
> Erlang uses different terminology).  Your car has a master hydraulic
> cylinder and
> slave cylinders.  The analogy is pervasive in technology.  See a very
> short list
> at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)
> which ends with "Global Language Monitor
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Language_Monitor> found the term
> "master/slave" to be the most
> egregious example of political correctness
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness> in 2004, and named
> it the most politically
> incorrect term of that year."
>
> The one thing "slave" does not mean in technology is any kind of human
> being.
>
> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 21:51, Benjamin Lang <langbnj using gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Richard,
>>
>> Thank you, that’s interesting. There is also something called an
>> “etymological fallacy”. I think current usage is more useful here than the
>> “science of truth”, i.e. the Ancient Greek idea that the (sometimes
>> inferred) derivation of a word allows us to grasp “the truth of it”.
>>
>> In current usage, a “server” is someone who brings you dishes in a
>> restaurant. A “client” is a customer. A “slave” is a human being forced to
>> perform work under duress and considered nothing more than a machine, say a
>> dishwasher or a tractor. And in some regions, this echoes on and is
>> offensive and hurtful to some.
>>
>> A new user, wanting to reduce output from R, would probably reach for
>> “-q” or “—quiet”. This makes sense in the same way that “—stentorian” is
>> not a good alternative to “—verbose”.
>>
>> Best,
>> Ben
>>
>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 10:55, Richard O'Keefe <raoknz using gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> One of my grandfathers was from Croatia.  Guess what the word "slave" is
>> derived
>> from?  That's right, Slavs.  This goes back to the 9th century.  And then
>> of course
>> my grandfather's people were enslaved by the Ottoman empire, which was
>> only defeated
>> a little over a hundred years ago.  My other grandfather was from the
>> British isles,
>> where to this day followers of the same prophet are enslaving people like
>> me
>> (except for being female).  So I'm sorry, but I'm not impressed.
>>
>> How many computers are "servers"?  There's that whole client-server thing.
>> Guess what "server" comes from?  That's right, the Latin word "servus",
>> which
>> means guess what?  You got it again: "slave".  Are we to abolish the word
>> "server"?  What about the word "client"?  Ah, that's part of the
>> client-patron
>> system from Rome, so what about the patriarchy, eh?
>>
>> We are dealing with something called "the genetic fallacy".
>> "The genetic *fallacy* (also known as the *fallacy of origins* ...)
>>  is a *fallacy* of irrelevance that is based solely on someone's
>>  or something's history, *origin*, or source rather than its
>>  current meaning or context."  (Wikipedia.)
>>
>> Context matters.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 17:10, Abby Spurdle <spurdle.a using gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > Personally I much prefer backwards compatibility to political
>>> correctness.
>>>
>>> I agree with Rolf, here.
>>> And as someone that's planning to write a Linux Terminal Emulator, in
>>> the medium-term future, I *strongly* defend this approach.
>>>
>>> And to the original poster.
>>> Haven't you seen The Matrix?
>>> (Second best movie ever, after the Shawshank Redemption).
>>>
>>> I would prefer the technology to be my slave, than I be a
>>> prisoner/slave to the technology.
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> R-help using r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
>>> PLEASE do read the posting guide
>>> http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
>>> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>>>
>>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]