I agree with the first half as it echoes my experience, but the second half hasn't been my exp.

To talk about design patterns as not as useful, only to then mention big O notation seems strange to me unless you are in a context where performance is critical?

Worrying about O(n) IME is far less important than choosing the right architectural pattern. O(n) issues are usually observable via metrics or QA and are typically straightforward to fix. By contrast, recognising that your pattern choice is wrong is harder (since it manifests during dev rather than in prod) and takes more effort to rectify.

I also disagree that patterns don't deserve a name. I have found it very useful when discussing with both seniors and juniors to have a common name for a pattern being described. Seniors known instantly and it can be helpful to have a resource to point juniors to if they aren't familiar. I have also found it useful when English isn't the first language.

I do agree that seniors don't typically try to fit standard patterns to their problem in a way that a junior might, that's a fair point.