These are names for products though, not programming concepts. A more accurate analogy would be calling a class a Kay template or calling a for loop a Lovelace construct. And it's great that we don't do that.
On-off switches. Or conditionals. Or bits (depending on implementations). Or truthy/falsey values.
> Turing Machines
Symbolic tape machines.
> Bolzmann machines
Hidden-unit binary threshold networks.
> Markov Chains
Cumulative event probability chains.
> Liskov Substitution Principle
Instance Substitution Principle.
> ISO 8601 dates
Big-endian dates (or simply YYYY-MM-DD dates).
> the MIT and BSD licenses
n-clause copycenter licenses.
Truth values.
> Turing Machines
Tape automata. (Though there are a lot of variants.)
> Liskov Substitution Principle
Behavioral subtyping. Even Liskov calls it this, but "SOBID" doesn't have the same ring to it. (BOIDS?)
> ISO 8601
Lexicographic dates. (ISO 8601 also specifies ordinal dates, with day of year (i.e. YYYY-DDD), but the "big endian" ordering principle is still accurate.)
Although "ISO 8601" tells you what specification describes it, which is a lot better than widgets named after people.
As someone with a degree in pure math, I can tell you, we had Turing machines, Boolean networks and Markov chains coming out of our ears. These are not programming concepts; all of these people were mathematicians/physicians who lived before computers even existed. This is just reaffirming the point that mathematicians tend to name things after each other.
> Liskov Substitution Principle
Actually, this is the only instance of a "truly" programming concept named after a person that I know of. And by "truly", I mean that a mathematician does not benefit from knowing this (would probably even write it off as "trivial"). It really is about the art of designing programs. Well, at least it has "substitution" in its name. Not like a Noetherian ring, which is just the opposite of an Artinian ring :D
Licenses belong to law. And ISO is not run by programmers either (for Christ's sake, they have a standard for A CUP OF TEA). This goes to show how much of a polymath a programmer has to be. Reminds me of this fun little rant: https://www.usenix.org/system/files/1311_05-08_mickens.pdf