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.

[–] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 43 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"I don't have time to discuss politics, I'm too busy getting the master and slave drives to work together."

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"That's just technology. Technology is nonpolitical." smuglord

[–] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Anyway, let me tell you about my next project: the Torment Nexus."

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 21 points 1 year ago

"If you don't like the Torment Nexus, just don't draw the ire of Immortal Cyberlord Bezos. Simple!" lord-bezos-amused

[–] Omniraptor@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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@hexbear.net 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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 2 points 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