More fools they 
That’s the same for just about any human language. They all have idioms. And I’m glad they do. Who wants to live in robot land where language is a dead protocol optimized solely for efficient communication? I guess engineers, but us normies enjoy fun.
Plus ungood
I’m not clear on this one. Do some pedants insist on one term over the other, or do they have some subtly different connotation? To me they’re two synonymous and perfectly acceptable ways to express “some slight increase over a rounded number”.
This one, while I understand the difference, I have no problem with. Using “between” as a choice among more than two items does not set my teeth on edge like the “less vs. fewer” thing does…
…such as the “less vs. fewer thing” does? 
No. Language can be playful and fun without being stupidly self-contradictory, as in “my head literally asploded” or “I could care less”. See, for instance, the wonderful turns of phrase from P.G. Wodehouse. They beautify the language, they don’t mutilate it.
Yes. Human language has no obligation to be dry and completely logical. My brain doesn’t lock up into a death spiral when I hear a contradiction or logically unsound statement. Being human is great.
As always I value your input, although it’s a little off topic to the point I was making with respect to the OP. I don’t have an issue with the usage, but this article lists a number of grammar blue noses who scorn the usage. With that, ‘hopefully’ should be as worthy of a finger wag as any other words/terms/phrases listed that the pedants like to nitpick, but this is one of the ones that gets a pass.
“Momentarily” as a synonym for “soon” sets me on fire.
Exactly!!! I love the supposed illogical constructions in language, and anyone subject to English spelling should be inured to it. Beauty is in the imperfection.
I very nearly referred to Wodehouse - because when he wrote “bimbo” he was talking about men
I think you mean “the doctor’s name”.
And acktually, it’s pronounced “Fronkensteen”.
Pretty sure the point was that Dr. Victor Frankenstein was the monster in the story, not the creature he animated.
Yes, exactly. What the Victor Frankenstein (I don’t know enough about academic customs of the time to know whether he merited “doctor”) did was monstrous. All Adam did was exist, and try to mind his own business.
[Sound of distant horses whinnying]
And kill a bunch of people, including a child, just for being friends or relatives of Victor’s.
Oh, and framed a woman for murdering the child, which led to her execution.
I see what you mean. “Ideally,” “ironically,” apparently," etc. go well beyond the scope of how I’d hopefully parsed “hopefully.”
Originally, bimbo is Italian for ‘little boy’, a contraction of bambino. Babe Ruth was the Bimbo. They dropped Bimbo on Hiroshima. If writing in Italian, that is.
ACK-tually 
, Victor was not a doctor. He was still a university student at the time, and had not yet received any degree or credential.
And ACK-tually, the creature was not named Adam. He compared himself to Adam a couple of times, but no one ever called him that, nor did he ask to be called that.
Just to be clear @Chronos already corrected me on that Doctor bit! 
Wasn’t he the Great Bambino? That’s what I saw in The Sandlot. He was also known as the Sultan of Swat and Colossus of Clout, according to those kids.
Bimbo is a brand of bread products owned by a Mexican corporation. The US dropped Bimbo on Hiroshima in many languages.