There are harmful words in use, but obviously it needs a user base to spread, the two can't live without each other. I'm not talking about swear words, but word

There are harmful words in use, but obviously it needs a user base to spread, the two can't live without each other. I'm not talking about swear words, but words that offend or misinform people or summarize a concept that can be harmful or generate controversy. Take web 2.0 for example. It caused quite a stir because nobody was sure what's 1.0 vs 2.0 was, then it faded away. I consider homeopathy a harmful word too. It sounds innocent, memorable and somewhat legit, but it's a dangerous thing. I think that if many people point out that a word is pointless, inaccurate and deceptive, then that user base can fade too, therefore it makes sense to attack the word and not go ad hominem on the users. > Gmail is "serverless" for me, but not Google. Thanks for bringing this up, for me as a user, gmail is nothing but a webapp for an email server. So is SaaS a better category for it or serverless? Without net connection (to a server) it's pretty useless. Even from the user point of view it's not clear what the term should cover. After all, we should focus on the technology, because that's promising at least.