Richard Stallman’s 2022 talk at EmacsConf highlighted a growing issue in software development: the trend of using obscure or whimsical names for programming tools instead of descriptive ones. Stallman emphasized that every package should have a name that clearly indicates its purpose. The piece critiques how modern naming conventions have strayed from this principle, particularly within the Emacs ecosystem, known for its clarity. The author recalls a confusing conversation about software tools like Viper, Cobra, and Melody, where understanding their functions required extra mental effort. This lack of clarity is juxtaposed with straightforward names in other fields, like the Golden Gate Bridge or IUPAC nomenclature in chemistry. The article argues that this naming trend creates a cognitive burden for developers. Each obscure name necessitates a mental switch from problem-solving to deciphering, leading to wasted time and energy. For example, when encountering "libsodium," a developer must pause to understand its function rather than focusing on the task at hand. This situation becomes even more cumbersome as projects grow in complexity with numerous dependencies that all demand similar attention. The author likens this to medical jargon that obscures rather than clarifies. Excuses for using fun or memorable names often miss the point. While some argue that catchy names help with marketing, the piece asserts that most programming tools don’t need to be marketable in the same way consumer products do. Boring names, while uninspired, provide clarity that is essential in technical fields. The author calls for a return to more meaningful naming practices, suggesting that developers could still use creative names as long as they relate to the functionality of the software. The shift in naming conventions reflects broader cultural changes in the tech community, but it’s important to prioritize clarity to reduce confusion and improve efficiency.