[Disclaimer: not a lawyer, this is not legal advice]
I understand they're trying to get rid of cascading attribution requirements for enterprise (which is part of the reason NIH syndrome became so prevalent!), BUT I really dislike this incarnation for two primary reasons:
1. It has conflicting branding. How is a newbie gonna know the difference? How many will misclick it because it sorts first, or because they don't know it's different than true MIT?
2. Some users may read 0 suffix as "original", "optimal", or "first" (0-index), further polluting the branding.
If they rereleased under another name these problems would be alleviated, but I don't think their intentions are entirely altruistic here.
I understand they're trying to get rid of cascading attribution requirements for enterprise (which is part of the reason NIH syndrome became so prevalent!), BUT I really dislike this incarnation for two primary reasons:
1. It has conflicting branding. How is a newbie gonna know the difference? How many will misclick it because it sorts first, or because they don't know it's different than true MIT?
2. Some users may read 0 suffix as "original", "optimal", or "first" (0-index), further polluting the branding.
If they rereleased under another name these problems would be alleviated, but I don't think their intentions are entirely altruistic here.