> in 2023, Google renames their chatbot from Bard to [Gemini][gemini] thereby completely eclipsing the 4-year-old independent protocol by the same name; this is possibly coincidental, which would make it the only unintentional attack on the open web by Google in the last 15 or so years —and at this point even that is doubtful;

So the theory is that Google chose the name of its AI -- easily one of the hardest and most revenue-impacting naming decisions it's made in years -- in order to create a name collision with a protocol nobody's heard of that's trying to revive GOPHER?

This is so obviously false that you have to re-read the rest of the article with the knowledge that the author is misunderstanding what they're seeing.

Much of what the author describes is increasing security and not wanting to work with XML.

Yahoo Gemini Ads team in shambles right now when nobody remembers they even existed.

I suppose the definition of intentional is a bit murky here.

Yeah, you're right that Google probably didn't look at a list of open web technologies that they disagree with and choose one for their new tool. I guess I'll call that "malicious intention".

I'm sure that, however the name was picked, Google's lawyers looked for prior uses of the name. I'm sure it came up, and Google shrugged its shoulders in indifference. Maybe someone brought up the fact this would hurt some open standard or whatever, but nobody in power cared. Is this the same kind of malicious? Probably not, but it still shows that Google doesn't care about the open web and the collateral damage they cause.

Did you at least read the excerpt you posted? It says the opposite of your conclusion, this is not even the worse interpretation of what was said, it's plain false.