The fact of the matter is, that this isn't a vulnerability because the system never does anything that it isn't supposed to do.
That's very true. However, one could argue that all flaws in programming could fall under this category. Computers are simply unable to do anything they were not told to do. If the code does something unexpected, then it is simply the computer following the programmer's flawed instructions.

Every industry has its own lexicon... in medicine you wouldn't mix them up... why do so with computers?
While this is true, there are terms used by the medical community that are, for lack of a better term, "dumbed down" for non-medical people. A fair number of people would look at you funny if you said you had a Myocardial Infarction, but tell people you had a Heart Attack and everyone understands. Also, even "specialized" subsets of lanugage are subject to ambiguities and interpretation; such is the limitation of language as a whole.

You can bitch about default setups all you like... really only two solutions exist:
1. Require a license to operate a computer. (Now who's being elitist?)
2. Remove the users' ability to damage their systems (TCPA anyone?)
Option 1 isn't necessarily elitist. One must have a licence to drive a car, because it is a powerful tool, capable of causing a great deal of damage in untrained hands. How is that different from a computer, other than it might be less likely to directly cause someone's death? The computer is the most powerful communications tool yet concieved by humanity, and can provide a person with the capability of causing intentional (viruses/worms/identity theft/etc) or unintentional (botnet/worm distribution) damage. Option 2 is a more realistic approach though, since people would get in an uproar about having to be licenced to use a computer (and governments would be liable to make this a big cash-grab).