It wasn't intended to be taken literally. But
the point behind it (there was one) was just
that naming is hard. It's not easy to find a
reasonable and consistent way to name things,
including functions. (I think we agree about
that, at least.)
Yes, naming is one of the hardest thing. Still when we see names that could be improved and where most agree shouldn't we try?
You make it sound like because naming is hard bad names are ok, or that any new name will be barely better as naming is hard. If I strawman your position we could name every new function as function5318759 with an incremental number because hey naming is hard we might as well give up :-)
I'm joking of course :-)
Philippe