We should rename original „Linus’s law” to „Linus’s fallacy” - especially for things related to security.
This article is supportive of Linus's Law, so you can't rely on it to make your case for you. Given the existence of etymologists, the odds that one of your readers is an etymologist approach one as the number of eyes approaches the population of Earth.
Etymologists aren't particularly good at fixing bugs, though they'll happily tell you the history of the word "bug".
I think that's a typo. Its supposed to be "entomologist".
Sort of, but it's Eric Raymond's fallacy, which should be given as little weight as everything else he proclaims. It's also generally wrong in science, speaking from experience in experimental physics.
I strongly agree that it's wrong in science based on my experience in fluid dynamics. Some things that are easily demonstrated to be wrong have high citations. I've speculated before that peer review might contribute to Linus's law being false in science, because many people do seem to figure "It's already been checked, I don't need to do any checks of my own": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22290907
Linus' law being, if something can be dropped it will be dropped?