Therein lies the rub. By not honouring the trademark, the fork made the association of service, support, otherwise to Notepad++ making it seem like it was officially supported.
Imagine if someone who used the fork attempt to get support on a product that wasn't supported and, when faced with limited responsiveness, etc. decided to denigrate the original developer by lambasting them on HackerNews, et al. The reputational damage alone would be seen as a reason to defend the mark.
I work with a very large OSS nonprofit who has trademarks in most of the geos around the world and vigourously defends them for precisely this reason: reputational damage undercuts the community, the developers, and the reason for existence.
In the grand scheme of things, this isn't shocking. The push for OSS weights and outputs (looking at you, GPT-OSS) is great and all but the SOTA still sits within proprietary, closed-source land.
Can agree with this (to a certain extent). Spending time in both America and Ireland, there's a definite difference in the extent to which "I can only get there by car versus public transit/other types of transport" is incorporated into the culture. By far, more urban/suburban/rural density with appropriate public transportation support leads to more freedom to walk, bike, etc. Geographically, however, there are clear reasons why places like the US and Brazil have a strong incentive to rely on cars over anything else. Distance between cities and towns, poor public transport (esp. outside of urban areas in the US), etc. cause this to be an issue.
Ireland actually arguably has a bit of a crisis coming up there; over the last 40 years or so one-off housing (ie rural housing completely in the middle of nowhere, rather than in villages) became more and more common, until the planners clamped down on it. The people living in those houses, which are completely impossible to serve with public transport and utterly dependent on cars, are going to age, and sooner or later it is going to become a serious problem, because once they're unable to drive they'll be trapped in their homes.
It's not a big proportion of housing on a national scale, but still enough that people living in completely isolated houses in more common in Ireland than in most places, and enough that it could become a serious wellbeing problem as the residents age.
almost like NOAA, had it not been savaged by this current anti-science admin, would be able to lend further credibility here. As it stands, several researchers that I know of, formerly of NOAA, were banging this drum loudly for decades.
So, curious application especially given the work that Benchwright.io, MLCommons, ArizeAI, and others have provide regarding drift, etc. How do you differentiate yourself from those offerings (knowing I'm not neutral here but fascinated by drift, tolerances, characterization, etc.)?
One of my customers actually requires attribution to agents if they're used, not only for tracking purposes but also for understanding potential vectors for slopcode. It's been useful and occasionally enforced. That being said, implementation without due consideration and warning should be frowned upon.
Great article and something that I've envisioned myself: a forge combined with a libary (of sorts). Looking forward to the forcing-function of GitHub's changes recently pushing folks to develop new, more engaged ways of maintaining code.
I managed to build this the other day. Looking good!
As noted by other authors, there does seem to be a wide surface area for attacks so, security remediation does seem to be a top-of-queue thing to be handled.
Tends to be a problem. I've tried to mitigate these problems by using either external harnesses (aka GitHub actions that are "fixed" based on known-good) or by using n-number of witness agents (e.g. Kimi/Qwen/whatever <=> Claude/OpenAI/Google). Generally sucks more time and energy (and now token/$).
that being said, I still have a "fix the code, not the test" line somewhere in here...
Therein lies the rub. By not honouring the trademark, the fork made the association of service, support, otherwise to Notepad++ making it seem like it was officially supported.
Imagine if someone who used the fork attempt to get support on a product that wasn't supported and, when faced with limited responsiveness, etc. decided to denigrate the original developer by lambasting them on HackerNews, et al. The reputational damage alone would be seen as a reason to defend the mark.
I work with a very large OSS nonprofit who has trademarks in most of the geos around the world and vigourously defends them for precisely this reason: reputational damage undercuts the community, the developers, and the reason for existence.