@BionicNigga @romin >There is a far greater cult of personality around Richard Stallmann than there is around Linus.
If that was true, then all the software would be named; "Stallmanx" or "Stallmax".

>Calling Linus’ kernel for a Unix-like operating environment “Linux” does not constitute a fucking cult
It's not Linus's kernel (thousands of people have worked on it) and it can only function in the environment of a complete OS (GNU) - making an error over and over and over and over because it raises up "dear leader" does constitute a cult of personality.

It wouldn't constitute a cult of personality to just refer to Linux as Linux.

>the X obviously implies association with Unix
It's a mistaken implication, as Linux has no association with Unix - there only 2 similarities which I have pointed out.

>open source grew from Linux subculture, quit being pedantic.
It came from a proprietary culture that was about more functional software, faster, no matter the proprietary consequences, that happened to have some people that also were "fans of Linux"; http://catb.org/~esr/open-source.html

>The fact that “free software” has an existing connotation that has to be explained away every time you say it makes it a bad term
It needs to be explained only once and people don't make the same mistake again.

You can say libre software or unfettered software if you are too afraid to say that free means freedom.

"open source" has an existing connotation that cannot be explained away without a long explanation.

>I don’t dispute that those things like DRM for instance are bad, just making up your own condescending name for something you don’t like is childish.
What is childish is obeying the proprietary masters by doing what they want, as "everything not professional is childish".

>Problem?
Yes, because they are confused and have also never seen; https://opensource.org/osd