The conclusion lists three reasons why not to use the term, the invocation of colonialism being only a third of the reasons. Personally, I appreciate the appeal

The conclusion lists three reasons why not to use the term, the invocation of colonialism being only a third of the reasons. Personally, I appreciate the appeal to combat historically inaccuracy. Semantic drift should be combated even when it seems futile; disinterest does not mean uninterested, dammit. Begs the question is not raise the question. All of this makes me nonplussed. > Given enough copy/pasting from Stack Overflow you might get something that superficially looks right, just like with enough work you can make an airport out of bamboo that looks right, but it won't actually meet its spec for functioning correctly because important stuff will be missing. There’s plenty of code that just works despite not meeting the spec, though. The allegation of cargo culting is levied against empty formalities that betray a misunderstanding of why something works or not. There are plenty of tales in software of “load-bearing code” and lines lost to faded tribal knowledge and even magic comments that are not to be removed because somehow they keep the end program functioning.