A lot of those usages of "open source" mean something different, totally unrelated to software. The word "source" there often doesn't mean source code, but more

A lot of those usages of "open source" mean something different, totally unrelated to software. The word "source" there often doesn't mean source code, but more like sources of information, like when you cite your sources in a paper. That's the older meaning of "open source intelligence", meaning information you could get from freely available sources like phone books or maps. OSI even explicitly acknowledged those older meanings, and they also knew there were very scattered and inconsistent usage of the term before OSI. This still doesn't mean that OSI didn't coin the meaning of open source: a watered-down synonym for free software that de-emphasised its political philosophy. The fact remains, even openly acknowledged in Martin Tournojj's article when he looks at the growing usage of the term, that the reason we're all saying Open Source is because Tim O'Reilly bankrolled OSI's marketing campaign[1], and it was so effective, that they convinced us the term was so natural that it was our own idea. It wasn't. It was OSI's. Now, I get the urge to say "OSI doesn't get to decide!" because you don't want to be told what to say or what to believe. You want the word to have a different meaning. You're a free agent, dammit, nobody gets to tell you how to talk. Well, you're not as free as you think you are, because you wouldn't be talking this way if it weren't for a whole society that was influenced by the power of the wealth of one individual in the late 1990s. Your fashion choices are not are individual as you think they are[2], and neither is your language, nor even your beliefs. [1] https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-meme-hustler https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-meme-hustler [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja2fgquYTCg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja2fgquYTCg