3 ms·

a lot of these company names are kind of hilariously non-descript. no smart wordplay, no chance of coming up with a good jingle for a commercial. exactly what y

a lot of these company names are kind of hilariously non-descript. no smart wordplay, no chance of coming up with a good jingle for a commercial. exactly what you would expect, really. "Science Applications International Corp" "Radiation Monitoring Devices Inc" "Physical Optics Corp" "Physical Sciences Inc" "Applied Nanotech Inc" edit: this is a light hearted comment. i am not saying your favorite non-descriptly-named company is worse than any other name.

andrewmcwatters 8mo ago
International Business Machines… Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company General Mills General Motors American Telephone and Telegraph Company… You seem to have it backwards. Companies being called Poopity Scoop is a modern phenomenon. Companies have otherwise been named like this for centuries.
- john_strinlai 8mo ago
  i havent heard a good jingle for any of those (i didnt make the judgement you think i made. i simply said they are what i expected: very non-descript)
  - tdeck 8mo ago
    IBM had a corporate songbook! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YBpNzxz1XgU https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YBpNzxz1XgU
    - john_strinlai 8mo ago
      that was fascinating, i had no idea. and, surprisingly, i dont think i knew of this channel which seems to have a ton of interesting videos. thanks for that.
bathtub365 8mo ago
There’s an interesting talk that relates to this: Trevor Paglen’s “Seeing the Secret State: Six Landscapes”[0]. He investigates some of the front companies involved in the CIA’s extraordinary rendition program. They mostly have unassuming names, presumably by design. [0]: https://youtu.be/lvEMSRKniWk https://youtu.be/lvEMSRKniWk
foxglacier 8mo ago
The cover is a strange thing to judge a book by. SAIC isn't somehow worse because they couldn't think of a witty name 60 years ago. IBM couldn't either, nor General Motors. Basic descriptive names are actually pretty good compared to meaningless "Meta" or "Google" that have no idea what industry they even want to appear to be in.
- john_strinlai 8mo ago
  >SAIC isn't somehow worse because they couldn't think of a witty name 60 years ago. is "non-descript" an insult now, or something? where do you read "worse" in my comment?
  - dekhn 8mo ago
    Your comment reads as negative about the corporations even if that's not what you intended. There's something about the way it's reads (I noticed myself when I read your comment, then noticed your edit at the bottom). Nuance usually does not translate well on the internet.
ramoz 8mo ago
The first one is literally a well-known massive corporation
- john_strinlai 8mo ago
  >The first one is literally a well-known massive corporation i am sorry, i really must have messed up in my comment somewhere. on top of not trying to insult these companies by saying they have non-descript names, i was also not trying to imply that they are small. non-descript, and what i expected of government contractor names. thats all.
zoklet-enjoyer 8mo ago
That's what I did when I created a hemp company in 2019. And then I registered a dba (doing business as) with the real name. It made banking easier.

andrewmcwatters 8mo ago

International Business Machines… Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company General Mills General Motors American Telephone and Telegraph Company… You seem to have it backwards. Companies being called Poopity Scoop is a modern phenomenon. Companies have otherwise been named like this for centuries.

john_strinlai 8mo ago
i havent heard a good jingle for any of those (i didnt make the judgement you think i made. i simply said they are what i expected: very non-descript)
- tdeck 8mo ago
  IBM had a corporate songbook! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YBpNzxz1XgU https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YBpNzxz1XgU
  - john_strinlai 8mo ago
    that was fascinating, i had no idea. and, surprisingly, i dont think i knew of this channel which seems to have a ton of interesting videos. thanks for that.

bathtub365 8mo ago

There’s an interesting talk that relates to this: Trevor Paglen’s “Seeing the Secret State: Six Landscapes”[0]. He investigates some of the front companies involved in the CIA’s extraordinary rendition program. They mostly have unassuming names, presumably by design. [0]: https://youtu.be/lvEMSRKniWk https://youtu.be/lvEMSRKniWk

foxglacier 8mo ago

The cover is a strange thing to judge a book by. SAIC isn't somehow worse because they couldn't think of a witty name 60 years ago. IBM couldn't either, nor General Motors. Basic descriptive names are actually pretty good compared to meaningless "Meta" or "Google" that have no idea what industry they even want to appear to be in.

john_strinlai 8mo ago
>SAIC isn't somehow worse because they couldn't think of a witty name 60 years ago. is "non-descript" an insult now, or something? where do you read "worse" in my comment?
- dekhn 8mo ago
  Your comment reads as negative about the corporations even if that's not what you intended. There's something about the way it's reads (I noticed myself when I read your comment, then noticed your edit at the bottom). Nuance usually does not translate well on the internet.

ramoz 8mo ago

The first one is literally a well-known massive corporation

john_strinlai 8mo ago
>The first one is literally a well-known massive corporation i am sorry, i really must have messed up in my comment somewhere. on top of not trying to insult these companies by saying they have non-descript names, i was also not trying to imply that they are small. non-descript, and what i expected of government contractor names. thats all.

zoklet-enjoyer 8mo ago

That's what I did when I created a hemp company in 2019. And then I registered a dba (doing business as) with the real name. It made banking easier.