Sticks and Stones

Language software for recruitment technology helps businesses to hire the right people. The right software will know which words to use in the recruitment process to get targeted results.

First of all, what the hell am I talking about? You know when you've been looking for a job for the last three months and your life savings is running out and you're really thinking what it would be like to wake up in your car and shower at the YMCA and how it might not be "as bad as they make it out to be" and then you see a job opening that you're qualified for and you're like, nah, too much hidden hostility in my semantic analysis of this job posting?

Me neither. But if you're the kind of person who already has a great job making lots of money and a huge difference in the way people live in the world together and you're trying to propel your future even further, then this is for you:

We might not realize it, but the terminology used in job descriptions turns some people off, subconsciously or not. And if you're trying to be a good business, you need to get everybody on board, not just the typical Mr. Obvious, or Ms. Obvious as the case may be.

Women don't like 'coding ninja' as it represents hostility in the workplace. 'Stakeholders' means non-white people need not apply. 'Competitive' and 'leader' are discouraging terms for females, according to one textmaster recruiter optimizer, whereas 'support' and 'interpersonal' are inviting to female candidates.

Businesses care because the more balanced your workforce, the more profitable your work. This would explain why there are so many of these text-analysis for job-posting services out there, and enough for me to find an article on it in the national news.

Here's an example of why we need to think more about inclusionary language in our tech-driven, text-based world:
Man is to computer scientist what woman is to homemaker

Notes:
Why some job adverts put women off applying
July 2018, BBC News

Post Script:
Since we're getting all semantimaniacal here, can I just point out that the word 'inclusionary' shows up as a misspell on my autocorrect, with 'exclusionary' the suggested replacement. Just saying. (And no, semantimaniac isn't in there either...).

Neologos

Word of the day:
"Ansible"
Ursula K. LeGuin coined this word in her seminal work The Left Hand of Darkness in 1969.
It is a contraction of "answerable", but other scifi writers use it to call any device for instantaneous or at least faster-than-light communication.

It's also the name of a software for platform automation, which is drowning your LeGuin results.

The Left Hand of Darkness
Ursula K. LeGuin, 1969

Our Terran Heritage

Just for personal archival purposes; somehow, as a scifi reader of 20 years, I've only recently come across this word enough times to make me look it up.

It's the word "Terran" and it refers to Earth-things, or particularly people from Earth. This would be used in contexts where the story takes place somewhere beyond our planet, to the point where we would need a name bigger than Chinese, Arabic, Congolese, or Midwesterner. ("Human" doesn't fit the same purpose, for some reason.)

Science fiction is a literature of neologisms - in fact, making up words is the favorite pastime of a scifi writer. It's also necessary in a genre where the point is to write about things that haven't happened yet. The fact that any word has become a de facto term is exceptional.

And yet, here it is: "Terran" was in heavy use in the 60's, and traces its origin back to the scifi magazines of the late 40's. I can't stop, however, until I see where Asimov fits into this.

Isaac Asimov used the term “Terrapolis” in his 1940 story Homo Sol:

Tan Porus stared thoughtfully out the window. Terrapolis, capital city of Earth, sprawled beneath him to the very edge of the horizon.
link

As with anything scifi, it's a safe bet to say Asimov is the origin.

Post Script

In a story taking place beyond our solar system, we might be called Solarians, and in fact we were, in the Asimov story mentioned above.