You didn't get it. Not radically new things. There are existing words, but using them wouldn't allow the people from Urbit to think about combining concepts in the radically different way they are doing.

In fact, they would end up saying: well, all we are trying to do already exists, so let's just write a library here, another there. You can argue this would be better, but their goal is to do a completely different thing, even if it looks it could be done with a new library for something.

No... I got what you meant. But there are plenty of new languages and even reinvent-the-world projects that reuse existing terminology just fine. There's nothing about using existing words that makes it harder to "develop new things"- in fact, it makes it easier.

Indeed, even a Post Res mathematical structuralist will admit the instrumental utility of common words for similar entities; would you care to list a few, and their mappings between the jargon of Earth and Mars?