It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.
well, i didn’t know that computer hardware could be consenting and engaged with with the BDSM community at large.
Personally i just like master/slave because it’s really fucking obvious how things are supposed to work. Outside of that there are some more specific terminologies that work better in specific applications. Leader follower is pretty cringe, but mostly gets the point across. Main and sub is already established lingo in the electrical field from what i understand.
I really hope they adopt this. Not just for tech. To me, the world would become a little bit more interesting with a payment card called a DomCard™ in it.
I remember back in the late 90s being in college. I brought my girlfriend to class one day. She raised her hand after the professer was explaining Master/Slave roles. Keep in mind, I’m white. She’s black. She’s not enrolle
d in this class AT ALL.
So the professer sees this, and says “Yes, you there, girl I’ve never seen in 4 months of this class”
And all she said was “Master and Slave drives? That sounds sexy!”
The whole class facepalmed.
… sounds like she was fun!
Big spoon/Little spoon
Both spoons are the same size. Different size ones wouldn’t fit together like that.
Primary/secondary?
That doesn’t make sense depending on the context. New I2C standard switched to controller/target for example. This conveys that one device is controlling the other devices.
My suggestion doesn’t make sense in the classic PATA sense either, since there were potentially several “slave” devices, but they weren’t slaves so much as dependent on the “master.”
Parent/child(ren)(s)
i saw main/clone for storage once
I have my primary, and my secondary, and my secondary secondary.
Leader/follower works though.
Dom drive: “Daddy”
Sub drive: “UwU”
Nya
OwO and UwU drives. That’s perfect.
I’ve seen ‘Active / Passive’ used, that seems alright. There’s plenty of alternative terms to use without borrowing terminology from sexual roleplay.
Anyway, the Sub is supposed to be the one that’s actually in control for this kind of thing (otherwise you’d just be in an abusive relationship), so that confuses things when you start trying to applying it elsewhere.
I’m the passive one in my relationship.
I’ve seen ‘Active / Passive’ used, that seems alright
That’s not always an accurate description though.
Consider a redundant two node database system where the second node holds a mirrored copy of the first node. Typically, one node, let’s call it node1, will accept reads and writes from clients and the other node, let’s say node2, will only accept reads from clients but will also implement all writes it receives from node2. That’s how they stay in sync.
In this scenario node2 is not “passive”. It does perform work: it serves reads to clients, and it performs writes, but only the writes received from node1. You could say that node2 slavishly follows what node1 dictates and that node1 is authorative. Master/slave more accurately describes this than active/passive.
There’s plenty of alternative terms to use without borrowing terminology from sexual roleplay.
Do I have news for you …
The issue is acronyms; there’s millions of products, schematics, datasheets, and manuals that refer to them as MISO and MOSI with no further explanation. Any new standard that doesn’t fit runs into the 15-competing-standards problem, and ought to be followed by an “AKA MISO” every time it’s used.
Just have to find synonyms that begin with the same letters, possibly in different languages.
Other countries all use the English terms.
Except for the French, probably.I was thinking of synonyms in different languages, like magister and scholasticus, which are teacher and student in latin.
Mylord and Squire
M’lady and Squire.
M’lady and suitor?
I’ve seen “Main” and “Secondary” be used exactly for this reason, as they keep the same first letter so don’t require acronyms to be changed.
I’ve seen “Main” and “Support” be used likely for the same reason
Top and bottom
Power bottoms would like a word with you.
Hopefully more than a word
Current is flowing when probing the shunt. It’s getting a little hot
Anyway, the Sub is supposed to be the one that’s actually in control for this kind of thing
I think there’s a better way to put that. It’s often called a power exchange. Both people involved can rescind consent at any time, and there’s also negotiation that happens before scenes to set up expectations and limits, but I don’t know too many subs that want to be in control of a scene. My experience is they want to give up control in a way that is safe.
Yeah, you’re right, that was a clumsy word choice. My experience is mostly from watching The Duke of Burgundy tbh
Hadn’t come across that one, might have to check it out.
I thought the connotation was chattel slavery, not BDSM.
the connotation in that the master is in control and the slave having no control, and ironically is only a racial issue in the US
the Sub is supposed to be the one that’s actually in control
This is a myth, presumably meant to be reassuring to subs that are new to BDSM, at the expense of risk awareness. In principle the sub is no more “in control” than the dom is, and in practice they are often significantly less so.
Active / passive means something different.
Master / slave means one thing tells the other thing what to do, and the other one does it without question. The slave is not passive in performing the task.
It’s a relationship that should never occur between humans, but it does occur with machines. The terms describe what is happening accurately. Other synonyms are approximations and lead to confusion in a field where confusions cause bugs / failures and depending on what you’re working on, that could put lives in danger. Do you really want such confusion around the systems of an airliner, where everything has redundancy, master/slave relationships are common and something being passive means “it’s only monitoring what’s going on”?
You want more Boeings? Shit like this is a good way of getting there.
I seem to have stumbled into an argument that people are more passionate about than me. I mentioned I’d seen ‘active/passive’ used (in computer networking), and in that context, it ‘seems alright’ (in the sense of actively giving demands, vs. passively accepting them [and doing what it’s told, of course])
If someone has made good-faith request not to use certain terminology (like Master/Slave), then I’m generally more interested in finding acceptable alternatives than I am in dismissing their concerns outright. If, at the end of a proper search for alternatives, nothing suitable can be found, then fair enough. I’d question the idea that it’s really impossible to find something else though, but - for now at least - I’m sure that Dom/Sub isn’t it.
Same here - I’m more interested in a suitable alternative than to argue whether they are justified in their concerns.
I don’t think there’s a single right answer though. This terminology is used in many scenarios, each a little different and each with a potentially different answer
- Most git distributions now default to “main” and some variation of branch. It was a trivial change and seems as meaningful.
- Jenkins changed from master-slave, to controller-agent (or node). I’m still getting used to it but no big deal.
- Many DB or service distributed systems changed from master-slave(s) to primary-replica(s) and that also works
I’ll always like Primary/Secondary.
Agreed.
Also active/passive gets confusing crossing over into electronics where they already mean something.
Also pub/sub is already estsblished and used as common computing abbreviations
Leader / Follower
That’s the one I naturally came up with too.
Or just use the existing terms. People will find issues with just abuut anything.
Yeah this will just piss off the anti-porn/right-wing/tradcath(?) types instead of leftist/neolib/anti-racist types.
Leaving aside the problematic nature of the existing terms, the result was that people actually thought a little more about the relationships the things had and started using better/more precise terminology for the relationships: primary/secondary, active/hot/cold, parent/child, etc.
Net positive all round.
Woah there. You’re using about 25% more of your brain than the rest of the internet. We’re gonna need you to tone that reasonability down a bit.
I look forward to setting up my next polyamorous network connection. I can wait for the commands nmcli con choke me daddy ens1 thrupple0
Still easier than getting multicast working
This exactly. M/S ment nothing to me messing with HDDs as a kid.
It arguably only makes sense in a control node/ worker node context, but worker is obvious enough in that context.
I’ve seen publisher/subscriber out in the wild.
Gotta be careful with that one when talking data streams though.
A pub/sub pattern implemented for message queue flow is available in most cloud (and on prem) solutions.
That’s not bad actually.
Tab A; Slot B
I’ve seen “Domain Controller” and “Subscriber” for the sake of plausible deniability.
In the case of SPI, they want to keep intact the names MISO (master in, slave out) and MOSI. So they use things like “Main” and “Sub”.
Im not having much luck getting top/bottom accepted at my job.
Too ambiguous- bottoms are kings.
Penis / Onahole
We’ve been using Master/Bater down at the church.
