11–20 of 406 posts
Some more modern examples than "isosceles":
- Heaviside function → step function (edit: though maybe this one is, amusingly, already descriptive by accident?)
- Fourier domain → frequency domain
While I'm here, just a couple suggestions from me:
- Markov chain → memoryless chain
- Lebesgue integral → horizontal integral
There's an equally annoying problem in software engineering at large corporations (aka Google), where hundreds of services you need to know about are named with some cute name that gives you no idea what the thing actually is.
The lack of eponymous names used in category theory, for example, do nothing to aid in learning it. The term functor is no more descriptive than Carnap mapping.
The situation isn't much better in computer science, where now when you look up half the simple nouns in the dictionary, you get some language, tool, or javascript library claiming it.
Some profiling would show that names increase the difficulty of math by 0.001%. I don’t see an issue here.
Yep; check out how the programming community does it! We have descriptive names for things like "Apache", "React", "nginx", "Rust", and "Java"!
Yep; check out how the programming community does it! We have descriptive names for things like "Apache", "React", "nginx", "Rust", and "Java"!
Yep; check out how the programming community does it! We have descriptive names for things like "Apache", "React", "nginx", "Rust", and "Java"!
That's because "easy to google" is much more important in the short, medium, and long runs than "easy to guess what it does"
There's an equally annoying problem in software engineering at large corporations (aka Google), where hundreds of services you need to know about are named with some cute name that gives you no idea what the thing actually is.
https://expeditedsecurity.com/aws-in-plain-english/
Azure naming is comparatively more pedestrian.