While I agree with you that it is a didactic problem, I also think it is an optimisation heuristic. When working with engineers, it is expected that they know what, for example, git/version control is, hence such jargon will be sprinkled in conversation freely. That's how we compress the communication bandwidth. It is enormously costly if we document everything in a context free manner that anyone newly into the topic can understand, and people still won't understand.
It is also why learning from/teaching to users seem futile and why adhering to common UX patterns help adoption. We basically don't know our user and our user don't know us. So users commonly assume whatever product they use is omnipotent (having all features) while we, as product owner, need our product passing the Mom Test.
One would only spend so much effort on bridging the understanding gap. On internet, not so much, hence the copious amount of flame war. In a compassionate working environment, better. In family setting, ideally infinite.
> While I agree with you that it is a didactic problem, I also think it is an optimisation heuristic. When working with engineers, it is expected that they know what, for example, git/version control is, hence such jargon will be sprinkled in conversation freely. That's how we compress the communication bandwidth. It is enormously costly if we document everything in a context free manner that anyone newly into the topic can understand, and people still won't understand.
This is exactly the reason I ask some common knowledge jargon during interviews.
I start by saying, "hey, I know this is silly but I'm going to ask you some basic questions, please explain to me what you think it means.. JSON, REST..."
You'd be shocked how many strange / ridiculous answers I get, along with a few that after 10 words I know I'm speaking with someone that has a change getting the position.
This is part of an initial 30 minute phone interview.
It is also why learning from/teaching to users seem futile and why adhering to common UX patterns help adoption. We basically don't know our user and our user don't know us. So users commonly assume whatever product they use is omnipotent (having all features) while we, as product owner, need our product passing the Mom Test.
One would only spend so much effort on bridging the understanding gap. On internet, not so much, hence the copious amount of flame war. In a compassionate working environment, better. In family setting, ideally infinite.