I guess the lesson here is you don't have to use any of the technologies in the project as part of the project name if you don't want to. Especially if the namespace is already somewhat saturated. For my next project, TCPHTTPHTMLCSSJSLinuxAlpineContainerGCPGKEBlog...
Reread the thread starter. All those preexisting hyper things have nothing to do with this company, that's not the point.
And of course they're free to name their stuff after anything else they like, it's not a tricky question, it's just... weird? stupid? seo-manipulative? I don't know honestly, all I know is they had a more descriptive name at their disposal that had zero hits and they they passed on it.
I already said, they had a perfectly descriptive name but they chose the one easily confusable with 5 other things, I am curious to know their thought process. And what's yours?
Hyper is their protocol and I assumed they derived it from HTTP.
> Hypercore also includes a new URL scheme, hyper://, for referencing any Hypercore-based data structure. As Hypercores declare their data structure, this URL scheme can be used for a wide variety of use-cases. This URL scheme can improve interoperability among applications by providing flexible and modular access to hypercore directly.
All of their technology is based off of their hyper protocol.
But my point is that I don't really see the need to nazi people's nomenclature.
You could just, ya'know, discuss the tech itself...
> All of their technology is based off of their hyper protocol.
And that for some reason determines naming every product that uses that protocol.
> nazi
There's no need to be a nazi, but it should be an acceptable thing to ask, when identifier namespace is global, about why someone would choose to occupy an overlapping identifier even if a better more descriptive identifier is available, shouldn't it?
https://github.com/hypercore-protocol