The piety of those who wish everyone to be re-educated and the corpus of documentation to be rendered invalid would be sickening. At least in this instance it brings concepts more in line.
We need less confusing and diverse verbiage in the industry generally speaking, when we refer to the same concepts (server/instance/machine/node being examples), so I think the change is welcome on those merits alone, and if it happens to make people feel better, though there's no evidence of that, then great.
However it's important to understand that if the motivation is purely political, then this can be classified as political correctness, which has proven time and time again to be ineffective and actually /harmful/ to the left; as the right are clever to use it as a recruiting tool- often openly pissing off the left and making them hypersensitive to anyone not towing the line. This was true in the early 90's and it's true again today.
To quote Stephen Fry on political correctness: "if someone wants to shout faggot at me, I don't care, as a gay man. I know I'm supposed to, but I'm supposed to care on behalf of people who are, supposedly weaker than me. and I think it's the most patronising thing in the world. It's exactly the same political correctness that I grew up with which was then, the kind of religious political correctness; which is people complaining about television programmes, about swearing and nudity and violence: 'I am not shocked myself, it's just the vulnerable young minds, you see!'; well, fuck that, that's just not good enough. It really isn't. and that's my objection. it's.. denouncing from the pulpit.. I mean, Russia has political correctness, but in Russia the political correctness is that you can't say Tchaikovsky was gay."[0]
These comments were given before a debate (which unfortunately was derailed frequently) on the efficacy of political correctness; and he made detailed points about words being immediately co-opted to mean hateful things, if there is hateful intent, and largely intent is the most important factor to control for, certainly not language.
I will link to the full debate below;[1]
So, typically I'm against these kinds of measures, and that's the foundation on what this change was about.
If a change can stand by other merits, then sure, but to assume that this will help even a little, with no evidence provided- and to attribute such little weight to the human time in reconfiguring and reeducating is not just patronising in of itself, it's a little dehumanising to those it supposedly supports and forces re-education and labour on the entire development world.
I believe that to be immoral; unless, of course, the change can stand on other merits.
The piety of those who wish everyone to be re-educated and the corpus of documentation to be rendered invalid would be sickening. At least in this instance it brings concepts more in line.
We need less confusing and diverse verbiage in the industry generally speaking, when we refer to the same concepts (server/instance/machine/node being examples), so I think the change is welcome on those merits alone, and if it happens to make people feel better, though there's no evidence of that, then great.
However it's important to understand that if the motivation is purely political, then this can be classified as political correctness, which has proven time and time again to be ineffective and actually /harmful/ to the left; as the right are clever to use it as a recruiting tool- often openly pissing off the left and making them hypersensitive to anyone not towing the line. This was true in the early 90's and it's true again today.
To quote Stephen Fry on political correctness: "if someone wants to shout faggot at me, I don't care, as a gay man. I know I'm supposed to, but I'm supposed to care on behalf of people who are, supposedly weaker than me. and I think it's the most patronising thing in the world. It's exactly the same political correctness that I grew up with which was then, the kind of religious political correctness; which is people complaining about television programmes, about swearing and nudity and violence: 'I am not shocked myself, it's just the vulnerable young minds, you see!'; well, fuck that, that's just not good enough. It really isn't. and that's my objection. it's.. denouncing from the pulpit.. I mean, Russia has political correctness, but in Russia the political correctness is that you can't say Tchaikovsky was gay."[0]
These comments were given before a debate (which unfortunately was derailed frequently) on the efficacy of political correctness; and he made detailed points about words being immediately co-opted to mean hateful things, if there is hateful intent, and largely intent is the most important factor to control for, certainly not language.
I will link to the full debate below;[1]
So, typically I'm against these kinds of measures, and that's the foundation on what this change was about.
If a change can stand by other merits, then sure, but to assume that this will help even a little, with no evidence provided- and to attribute such little weight to the human time in reconfiguring and reeducating is not just patronising in of itself, it's a little dehumanising to those it supposedly supports and forces re-education and labour on the entire development world.
I believe that to be immoral; unless, of course, the change can stand on other merits.
[0]: https://youtu.be/vsR6LP7Scg0?t=422 (13m)
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST6kj9OEYf0 (2h)