• UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    That smuglord in a recent thread that said “programming.dev doesn’t allow politics” certainly allows programming.dev’s nonpolitical politics to ooze anywhere I can see a programming.dev user address of origin. smuglord

      • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I never got the complaints about that. It’s not inherently bad to have one thing exert complete control over another thing… the problem is when you start doing it to people

        • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think I’ve seen anyone with a problem with the computing concept itself, they have a problem with the unnecessarily unpleasant and offensive nomenclature. There’s lots of ways to express a leader/follower dynamic that’s intuitively understandable. Hell, call them Dom/Sub drives if you want to.

          There’s just no good reason to invoke historical attrocity that’s still ongoing to describe a concept like this.

          • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ok fair point and that is a really funny idea. But afaict dom/sub dynamics aren’t complete control and it would be pretty dangerous if they were