It's a selfish and unjustifiable situation to be in, where one group of people casually uses language that describes a different group in questionable terms without considering how the other group might feel. It's trivial to implement. Questioning it is a hair's breadth from defending it.
Why bring "current slavery" into it then, if this is what you mean? Personally, I'm pretty sure that slaves care about slavery, not language in Go documentation, but that's speculation of course.
> without considering how the other group might feel
Have you asked a slave in Saudi Arabia how they feel about the usage of the word Slave in Go documentation?
Because it was mentioned in the post you replied to.
> Have you asked a slave in Saudi Arabia how they feel about the usage of the word Slave in Go documentation?
Why Saudi? Slavery exists globally. You know someone whose ancestors were bought, sold and died as slaves. Ask them how they feel about it.
Maybe because it's easier to Google and find supporting evidence? You should give it a try.
> You know someone whose ancestors were bought
Sure, rather than the 40 million living it first hand.
The parent post links to global slavery information, here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23446390
The original post was about choice of language in code repositories.
I've no idea what you're objecting to.
I'm out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn
Deeply hypocritical, but it of course is easier and cheaper to focus on historical injustices. How about stopping business and censorship in China?
Who would Google have done business with in the 19th century?