You mean, “increases the quality of life for the subset of users who get deep into ant taxomony.”
That’s another several discussion threads. But yet relevant – how many of these common names are “confusing” precisely because the species they used to mean has since been split into lots of lookalikes? The North American “fly agaric” may not be (anymore) considered the same species as the Eurasian one, but it has been “fly agaric” for a lot longer than it hasn’t been.
It serves as a category for those – as you admit – near-identical species. If we look at it from the other side, what does distinguishing between those species serve to anyone other than a taxonomist? If I have them living in my kitchen, will my relationship with them change by my knowing exactly which of those dozen near-identical species they are? If I am sufficiently interested in them to start watching their habits as they go about my kitchen, will I learn different things from one species than I would from another? Realistically, if I have no idea what they are – and I won’t have any idea, if the species are indistinguishable – I’m probably just going to refer to them as “little black ants” anyway, as a convenient, descriptive label.
Better: “Little Black Ants,” plural, since they all literally are.