I'm speaking more of generalized educational practice than standardized curricula.

I do believe you specifically asked:

Isn't this standard in algorithms and data structures courses?

And the answer was 'no'.

It's okay to be publicly wrong. You wanted to learn something and now you know. But acting like you didn't ask it because you're feeling self-conscious just makes the whole thing awkward for everybody.

I certainly didn't get the impression that the OP's follow-up comment was trying to cover up a public display of ignorance. Rather it seemed to me that the comment about lacking a centralized curriculum was needlessly snarky and did not interpret the OP's comment charitably.

I... mis-parsed the reply as saying that bloom filters haven't been part of a curriculum from which to remove it, and took it as a dig at the lack in CS curricula (which sentiment I would empathize with).

When Google first brought it to light I know most of the people I had access to had never encountered Bloom Filters in their college carreers. I can think of a handful of other things we 'should have learned' in school that just never came up (and I'm not even talking about practical skills, just theory).

Apologies for the mixup. Interesting to see the mix of up- and down-votes I got from this one. I wonder if some people made the same mistake I did...

My comment was genuinely trying to help explain that there isn't a single curriculum! I didn't post the telling off that followed his response!

Fully agreed. Your comment was a fair question for clarification of what I meant by "curriculum". I thought I answered it fairly by clarifying that I meant topics generally covered by most universities in their in algorithms and data structures courses.

I'm not sure of the reason for the snark in the follow up. It was a fairly straightforward question and answer.

You are quite right. I must have conflated the tone of one comment and the text of the other in my mind when I was replying.