[Mimedefang] OT: Slaves

[John Rudd]

Adam Lanier wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-02-16 at 11:17 -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
>> Adam Lanier wrote:
>>
>>> Well, he does have a point...
>> Henceforth, the multiplexor shall be known as the "Dear Leader", and
>> the Perl processes will be "comrades".
> 
> I believe Lotus adopted (many years ago) the nomenclature
> 'superior/subordinate' but 'parent/child' or 'process/sub-process' would
> be reasonably appropriate in this context.
> 

Or supervisor/worker or controller/task.

Or, people could recognize that analogies have limited scope, and 
calling a particular process a "slave" does not then have implications 
about real world slavery.

I also like how the author asserted that any black person on a computing 
team that did NOT object to the use of the term "slave" was then 
automatically not self-aware.  Suddenly, anyone who doesn't agree with 
his perspective, even someone who is within his same victim space, must 
be somehow defective.  As opposed to just not being as over-sensitive as 
him.