The experience can't have been that bad, you just used "bc" and "pov" without batting an eye. I'm sure it's not a one off from you either. Reasonably so, because it'd be crazy to expand and explain what everything means all the time when it takes so little effort for anyone who wants to to familiarize themselves yet is so convenient for everyone who already knows in a place we'd expect it to be extremely common to understand such things.
And what I'm saying here is different from "you should not ever care to expand acronyms/abbreviations/initialisms", but that does not necessarily mean your goal should be that it's "fun" for every possible person (you'll never achieve that goal, under or overexplaining is never fun). It's about what's reasonably efficient for everyone likely to read the article. If 50%, 10%, 1%, and 0.1% of your audience will understand an acronym, abbreviation, or piece of jargon then it has different implications for what the right balance of reasoning is. Not every piece need target a generic audience, not every acronym need assume the reader can't be bothered to learn anything not spelled out for them in the page, and not everything is equally hard to figure out when it's not spoon-fed to the reader.
And, again, what is "Tensor Processing Unit" going to gain you if you don't already know that's what TPU stands for in the context of this article? I.e. who knows what a tensor is and why youd have a processor for them yet gains something by the acronym being expanded? People who don't know what a TPU is should start with a different article completely, probably several, and then read this one. Expecting every piece of writing should assume no knowledge blocks more knowledge than it helps share.
One thing I think the "lucky 10,000" XKCD gets bang on is that it doesn't frame sharing something with the 9,999 in mind as error any more than it blames the 1 for not knowing - instead the problem is dogging people for saying they've never heard of something. That's truly a golden rule, regardless the audience and so on, and doesn't require changing the way humans write to avoid problems like the one you ran into.