gyehuda

Very excited to see this. I used to work at Yahoo. This is a serious team with serious tech.

When this project was first published, the name of the company that published it was AOL. Before that, the company was called America Online. Subsequently it was named Oath, and now it's Verizon Media.

Names change. The common theme: names are not easy, sometimes they are beloved brands, sometimes they fall out of favor. Sometimes they were just bad ideas from the start, but happened anyway.

This gives rise to an interesting challenge for open source projects when you have an open source project in a github org, and the name of your company changes (or your company gets acquired), should you move the project? The problem is real since you don't want to lose your community, but you don't want to be stuck in the past.

Moloch is free. :-)

Preach Brother!

Moloch is a serious open source project, run by serious people who care about network security. They published their code under an open source license, showing off just how confident they are that it is solid. You can use this project to inspect packets on your network, you can learn how they built it and become a valuable network security engineer with a job somewhere finding people trying to hack in to your site. You can propose modifications to make this even better (and if your code is good enough, it will get accepted and used by security teams around the world). Or you could focus on the name they chose and the name of the company at the time this was published.

I'd seize the opportunity to talk tech and focus on network security. Infosec jobs pay better than brand marketing jobs.

According to my sources, DARPA wasn't involved in any of the child sacrifices, but they might use Moloch to help secure their networks.

Naming open source projects is a challenging task. The team hears this all the time, but hey, open source is about code you can use, a community you can join to make the code better, and the pride that people around the world want to use your code. If you are on a blue-team, you'll want to look at this project. If you are making lists of names that distract attention this goes on it.

oops, thanks. I meant to disclose my affiliation, not disclaim it.

FWIW, there was a research team at Yahoo who would actually get insights about the way people used language (relevant for contextual search) from Yahoo Answers. They were more active during the earlier years when the content quality was much higher. I don't know if they used Vespa in their mining process, but it would not surprise me if they did. Vespa is used in many projects because it's just that good. So if you are thinking of using it -- for Yahoo Answers, for Quora, whatever, go for it. I know a cancer researcher/engineer who wants to use Vespa for serving clinical reports and trial outcomes.

As for the current Answers site, well, we'll see what happens. I know the PM, a delightful person. I don't know the plan. But if there is a plan to make something useful from it, apply. It apparently makes money (otherwise it would have been killed long ago), and that means there's something to work with. When I started at Yahoo I was hoping to get onto the Groups team for the same reason -- a huge challenge to fix something that could be made cool again.

My job is to manage the open source process for Oath (which is essentially Yahoo + AOL). That includes helping ensure we can publish code like this and the hundreds of other projects we publish too. I'm the one who cares about open source licenses, patent clauses, github permissions, etc. Many large tech companies have someone in a comparable role and some of us work together in the todogroup to help manage the way we do opensource. I'm beginning to meet the people in Verizon who do the same. I hope their open source legacy grows too. Heck I celebrate when Google, Amazon, and Comcast publish great code too. It's good for us all. But Vespa is a real treat. It's really really special to Yahoo and we are very hopeful that the Big Data community sees how many things they can do with this, at scale, the way we have.