> There is nothing insidious with such a paint And yet, free software rhetoric emphatically characterizes nonfree as "causing harm in a way that is gradual or not easily noticed," which is Merriam-Webster's definition of "insidious."
Your response continues a long, and truly comical, tradition of the movement's invoking epithets of slavery such as the "chains put on users," when the real debate is over consumer expectation. Certainly, in *caveat emptor* times, consumer expectation was effectively nil, and yet we'd be laughed off the podium, possibly carried off in anger, if we described Roman citizens as "enslaved."