We’re not misusing them. We’re using JARGON, with full awareness that it is jargon and not the normal usage. A problem only arises when others insist that these should mean the same thing that the traditional words which they’re based on mean. Think of them as homonyms; they are not and are not intended to be redefinitions outside of their intended scope.
Jargon is a huge timesaver for those it’s intended to communicate among, at the cost of confusing those outside that circle. And that’s just fine as long as people are aware that there was no intention that the specialized usage fully represent – and certainly not replace – the original. I’m sure your fields, whatever they are, have corresponding example of words that communicate well among the practitioners but don’t mean what someone outside your field would use them to mean.
