>"Open source" and "free software" have always been mostly interchangeable and have since their inception not simply meant "source available".

Free software was coined in the 80s. I wasn't there for that.

Open source was coined in the 90s because we didn't want people to think that software which let you see the code was free of charge.

Then when they sold out a bunch of tech bros from SV decided that they knew best and redefined open source to mean whatever made their valuations go to the moon. The plan did work as expected because dot com crash.

The people around the OSI have always been share croppers that have been trying to get paid for other peoples work.

> redefined open source to mean whatever made their valuations go to the moon

Was it redefined? My impression is that it has always effectively been a synonym for free software, just not carrying the political leanings.

This is correct. 'Open Source' was a way to make it more palatable to business, but the definition was pretty much identical.

Writing "tech bro" and "sharecropper" makes it easy for people to stop trying to look for meaning in your writing.

Also, while I'm sure it's unintentional, your backwards of "sharecropper" smells racist.(It actually means paying someone for the right to do you your own work, and was an attempted to recreate slavery after slavery was banned in USA).