Nah, at this point, the word is so associated with being a slur towards trans people, that any other connotation is basically gone. Personally, I'm trans and I don't care a lot about it, but his usage sticks out as deliberately anachronistic
-
-
Replying to @MLE_Online @alainpannetrat and
Even as one of the cis, I wince whenever I hear that word used for transistor. I've heard it used more as a slur than anything else. I used to also be a staunch supporter of not changing "master-slave". Now? Just change it, plenty of other options.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @neilogd @MLE_Online and
tbh, if you were gonna Aussify it, Trano would probably be a better fit. Although that still sounds a little slurry to me.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @neilogd @MLE_Online and
yeah, as an australian, i really don't think it's "common" by any stretch in EE circles same as the master/slave, whitelist/blacklist "debate": who cares if you don't have an issue with them. but some people do, and you should do your best to be inclusive
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @The6P4C @MLE_Online and
Yeah, I used to be a bit more prescriptive when changing terminology. Sure, it can be an ass to do, but a few minutes, a reading level of a 5yo, and a thesaurus and you can probably still keep the acronyms.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
And I admit I still use whitelist/blacklist. Never really thought much about it. I got no issue switching to allow/deny. Honestly that is far more descriptive anyway.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Honestly, connotations aside, I've realized master/slave is just *bad* terminology. It's been used and abused so much that now the only meaning it has is "vague sense of hierarchy". We're better off with more specific stuff like initiator/target, server/client, producer/consumer.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Can even keep MOSI/MISO if you just go with, say, Main/Secondary
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Although, I'm not sure it even matters about even keeping them. As long as it's descriptive enough.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Initials notwithstanding, I think something like "host/device" works well (and we're already fairly used to that model from USB). SPI has been cloned, reinvented, and renamed a million times, so in this particular instance it's fair to just use different terms.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
For I²C I like initiator/responder or initiator/target (because different devices can initiate, "multi-master"), but I accept that we're unlikely to be able to change established master/slave terminology when it's part of an actual standard from Philips/NXP.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.