I am delighted to see that there are other Sprachpolizei among my readers. Great suggestions! But there might be some who wonder what the fuss is about. Language evolves, after all. Shakespeare's plays are full of usages that grate on modern ears. So who cares if "begs the question" has evolved to mean "forcefully raises the question" rather than "assumes what is to be proved" and "disinterested" now means "uninterested" rather than "not swayed by interest?"
My reply is this: Language is entirely conventional, onomatopoeia notwithstanding. So any sequence of letters in English is available to be assigned any meaning native speakers choose. But there are conceptual distinctions that it is extremely useful to mark and maintain by means of linguistic distinctions. "Not interested" really means something different from "not swayed by personal interest." We want to be able to say that a judge should not be swayed by private interest -- should be disinterested -- whereas a saint cares nothing for the pleasures and rewards of this world -- is uninterested in them. There are also concepts for which it is useful to have linguistic expressions. Assumes what is to be proved is one of them. And we damned well better be able to distinguish between prescribe and proscribe before we start taking our daily medications!