Though I personally have the feeling in exactly the opposite way, having used unix-likes for most of my adult life, I won’t argue with you on the principle of the idea (for obtuse syntax e.g. dd the disk destroyer or the infamous tar command come to mind).

At the same time… I really don’t think you chose your examples super well here.

cp and it’s mv companion don’t seem more ‘obtuse’ than copy written out in your example.

ls following the same two-letter logic for ‘list’ also does not seem out-of-this-world crazy syntax. In fact, I always wondered more about dir to list things, especially in a world where the things it lists are technically called folders not directories.

This same logic once again extends to lsblk to ‘list’ what? ‘block devices’ which describes all sorts of storage media in unix-land. Sure, it’s different, but in these specific examples I definitely don’t see an objective better/worse option. I mean, similar examples for obtuseness could be made e.g. for why the primary drive starts with a C: on windows, or why we have magical drive letters at the beginning at all if you come from the opposite paradigm.

And lastly your disk example is equally written as fdisk --list which once again just describes its own operation.

Dunno, I think both systems have their idiosyncrasies which you just find weird if you’re used to the other.