This is why CC0 and MIT matter for projects people depend on. Once you build on something with a restrictive license this is always a risk.
Cal.com is going closed source
191–200 of 337 posts
Re: Cal.com is going closed source
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
hey cofounder here. since it takes my 16 year old neighbors son 15 mins and $100 claude code credits to hack your open source project
Are you at all worried that the message you are spreading here is "We are no longer confident in our own ability to secure your data?"
[deleted]
Re: Cal.com is going closed source
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a meeting scheduler site? I feel like you're overestimating the capabilities of something that is akin to college graduate project. This company does not seem healthy at all: https://getlatka.com/companies/calcom I agree with the other poster that mention this is likely a publicity stunt but all it's really showing is that VC is still incredibly stupid with their money. All the more reason to seize it from them t…
About the friction, not the capabilities...I haven't switched off my biz calendar/appointment provider I'm paying for even though I've kinda outgrown it. I wouldn't under estimate switching friction.
How much does your friction avoidance cost, if you don't mind my asking?
Re: Cal.com is going closed source
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a feeling the real reason is them trying to avoid someone using AI to copyright-wash their product, they're just using security as the excuse.
At risk of self promotion, I think more people should adopt something like the Ship of Theseus license ( https://github.com/tilework-tech/nori-skillsets/pull/465/cha... ). It's not obvious if this will patch the clean room hole in licensing, but I'd rather see it play out in court than assume opensource is just fully dead
> It's not obvious if this will patch the clean room hole in licensing, but I'd rather see it play out in court than assume opensource is just fully dead
Are you willing to bear the burden of litigation?
Re: Cal.com is going closed source
#195LOL. Every generation has to learn anew that security through obscurity is no security at all.
Re: Cal.com is going closed source
#196I get the mentality but it feels very much like security through obscurity. When did we decide that that was the correct model?
They probably lack a sufficient density of people who remember why "security through obscurity" become an infamous concept. It belongs to that family of bad ideas that's superficially appealing, especially if you're still at that stage of your career at which you think past generations were full of idiots and you, alone, have discovered how to do real software development.
Re: Cal.com is going closed source
#197It's funny that this news showed up just as we (Xata) have gone the other direction, citing also changes due to AI: https://xata.io/blog/open-source-postgres-branching-copy-on-... We did consider arguments in both directions (e.g. easier to recreate the code, agents can understand better how it works), but I honestly think the security argument goes for open source: the OSS projects will get more scrutiny faster, whi…
Just wanted to appreciate the open-source work by Xata. I’ve been eyeing pgroll [1] for schema migrations after Liquibase license shenanigans (the only barrier for me is json-based migration instead of sql-based migrations)
Re: Cal.com is going closed source
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does your ideal world have an easy path to citizenship? I might like to live there.
> SAN FRANCISCO – March 17, 2026 – The Linux Foundation, the nonprofit organization enabling mass innovation through open source, today announced $12.5 million in total grants from Anthropic, AWS, GitHub, Google, Google DeepMind, Microsoft, and OpenAI to strengthen the security of the open source software ecosystem. https://openssf.org/tag/google "But that's Linux, how small libraries get audit budget..." fortunately…
It’s almost cute how insignificantly small that amount is considering the companies named. Great for The Linux Foundation of course, but it still feels like they are being cheap as heck.
Re: Cal.com is going closed source
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
After a release, attackers have effectively infinite time to throw an LLM against every line of your code - an LLM that only gets smarter and cheaper to run as time passes. In order to feel secure you’d need to do all the work you’d imagine an attacker would ever do, for every single release you ship.
The first few times it's going to be expensive, but once everyone level sets with intense scans of their codebases, "every single release" is actually not that big a deal, since you are not likely to be completely rebuilding your codebase every release
You still have to account for the non-deterministic behavior of an LLM, when do you know you have exhausted its possible outcomes for any given piece of code?
Re: Cal.com is going closed source
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a feeling the real reason is them trying to avoid someone using AI to copyright-wash their product, they're just using security as the excuse.
At risk of self promotion, I think more people should adopt something like the Ship of Theseus license ( https://github.com/tilework-tech/nori-skillsets/pull/465/cha... ). It's not obvious if this will patch the clean room hole in licensing, but I'd rather see it play out in court than assume opensource is just fully dead
I am incredibly skeptical that license is legally meaningful. (but obligatory IANAL.)
Generally speaking it is very very difficult to have a license redefine legal terms. Either this theseus copy is legally a derivative work or it isn't, and text of a license is going to do at most very very little to change that.