Interesting post on how REST got misappropriated! Too bad that this blog has stopped publishing. Here are some “least” accurate bits from this post. The post is richer than what I put here as clickbait ;-).

… in the mid-2000s, the people who were sick of SOAP and wanted to do something else needed their own four-letter acronym… Among this crowd, SOAP inspired contempt. Ruby-on-Rails dropped SOAP support in 2007…

If the get-shit-done crowd wasn’t going to use SOAP, they still needed some standard way of doing things. Since everyone was using HTTP, and since everyone would keep using HTTP at least as a transport layer because of all the proxying and caching support, the simplest possible thing to do was just rely on HTTP’s existing semantics. So that’s what they did. They could have called their approach Fuck It, Overload HTTP (FIOH), and that would have been an accurate name, as anyone who has ever tried to decide what HTTP status code to return for a business logic error can attest….

Luckily, there was this dissertation out there, written by a co-author of the HTTP/1.1 specification, that had something vaguely to do with extending HTTP and could offer FIOH a veneer of academic respectability. So REST was appropriated to give cover for what was really just FIOH.