What's with naming proprietary stuff "open"?

teraflop 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Clearly these products are being named by topologists, who have no objection to things being simultaneously open and closed.

	▲	_joel 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Schrödinger's Product

thesdev 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's following the open closed principle.

	▲	Anoian 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Its sad that you gotta be a software engineer, to immediately get this joke, because its pretty good

impulser_ 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It could be open in the literally sense of you aren't locked in, you have free access to any model you want.

Just because a name has open in it doesn't mean it has to be open source.

thih9 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s an AI era buzzword. It’s not a new process, e.g. when blockchain was trendy, “crypto-“ and “bit-“ became similarly popular and meaningless.

subscribed 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"Open" is a load bearing reference we all get :p

redlewel 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

blame openai they started it

echelon 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Would "OpenSourceRouter" be a trademark violation?

I've built one in Rust and want to market it.

	▲	Pet_Ant 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Not if you’re in a different domain, then it cannot be claimed to confuse customers. So if it’s a network router or a woodworking router, then you’re good. I can sells of red socks, and white socks, without getting sued by Chicago or Boston. If it’s in the same space… you might want to contact a lawyer. I believe Firefox had conflicts with earlier names like Phoenix and FireBird and they weren’t even browsers.