If you ship it, you can put your own name on it. That's what's noncontroversial. This has nothing to do with "corporate dominance". RMS was trying to dominate others by telling them how to talk. People find that kind of pedantry annoying.
RMS was trying to dominate others by telling them how to talk. People find that kind of pedantry annoying.
On one hand, you are correct that people found it annoying. In late 2000, I got flamed one of the FSF people for using the wrong language. (Referring to them as "Open Source".) That sort of pedantry can be very off-putting. On the other hand, it also says something interesting about our culture that factual correctness in our language and terminology is considered annoying.
If the civilizations of India and China can foster a greater respect for facts, precision, and knowledge than what we have here in the US, then they will surpass us in ways that go beyond even the economic potential of their urbanizing populations. Yes, reread that sentence and think about how tall an order that isn't. The mainstream attitude about knowledge in the US can be summed up by the word, "whatever."
It's not that facts are unimportant and annoying. The trouble arises when both parties know what is being said, but one derails the conversation and makes a big deal and insists things be said correctly- language is then getting in the way of communication.
Is this a comparison of wrote memorization vs. pragmatic knowledge? The tech world has seen so much change and new language in the last couple decades it's not surprising function description is more useful than names.
I for one agree with DiBona 100%.