←back to thread

454 points positiveblue | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
IshKebab[dead post] ◴[] No.45067039[source]
[flagged]
thanatos_dem ◴[] No.45067089[source]
Allowlist is arguably fitting for a list of things which are allowed.
replies(2): >>45067786 #>>45068492 #
xdennis ◴[] No.45068492[source]
There are so many terms in software which are nonsensical (starting with "computer science") which could be fixed.

The problem with changing whitelist to "allowlist" is that it implies that people who use whitelist are racists. You're not just virtue signaling (and confusing my spellchecker) but causing discord.

It would be perfectly fine if people switched to "allowlist" because they think it's a better term, but that's not the reason. They do it because they want to virtue signal or they're afraid of their peers (because they'll be called racists).

Using "allowlist" is actually bad because it gives agitators power and they keep changing more words to get more power.

replies(3): >>45068674 #>>45070025 #>>45070136 #
1. zzo38computer ◴[] No.45068674[source]
I think that you are right. "Allow list" (or, in some contexts, "inclusion list") would be a better term, especially in contexts where colours are involved and it would be confusing.

The reasons that they usually actually have are not very good though, like you say, but nevertheless sometimes it can result in something better and sometimes not. But, banning words is not the solution, though.