Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)L
Posts
0
Comments
17
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • I'll do my best :)

    Nintendo is suing palworld for patent infringement, meaning it thinks palworld is infringing (using without permission) one of Nintendo's patents.

    These parents went through the application process and the Japanese patent office decided they were valid (basically that they were new and inventive).

    Now, though, the validity of 2 of the 3 Nintendo parents are having their validity questioned.

    A pending Nintendo application (not yet a patent) is, at the moment, considered to not be patentable because it lacks the new and inventive part that is required of a patent. This was discovered because a third party told the patent office about something that existed in some sort of publication before the Nintendo application was started (basically). This earlier-existing thing is called prior art. Prior art is sort of like a quasi-patent in the sense that new applications' new and inventive determination is based on basically all previously existing stuff. Just because Nintendo didn't disclose it and just because the patent office itself didn't discover this prior art doesn't mean it does not still operate to block the new application's new and inventive idea.

    Now Nintendo has to demonstrate to the patent office that its new application is actually different from the prior art or that the prior art should, for some reason, not actually qualify as prior art. If it is successful, it can become an actual patent (assuming all the other stuff it needs is correct).

    This all matters because this new application stems from existing Nintendo patents. This means basically that Nintendo patented something extensive that can be broken into smaller parts that are also patentable. This is confusing but it's sort of like if you designed a 3-in-1 hot coffee, espresso, cold brew machine (on paper). It was so unique that if you separated the espresso part of it it was still new and inventive over everything else in existence, which makes it patentable. As well, if you separated the cold brew part, it was also new and inventive (therefore patentable).

    This new application is like the cold brew part of the example above. The espresso part was already found to be new and inventive (now a patent) but the discovery of this third-party prior art is not only blocking the new and inventiveness of the cold brew part (new application), but also of the entire 3-in-1 machine (already a patent). This could happen, for example, if someone in India invented the 3-in-1 machine but the Japanese patent office didn't know about it and Nintendo didn't know about it when Nintendo first tried to patent its 3-in-1 machine with the Japanese office. Now, the India machine has been brought to japan's attention during this new application and it could lead to the office reconsidering the validity of Nintendo's 3-in-1 machine altogether.

    Hope this helps! I tried to make it easy enough to follow with a more imaginable example but the whole thing is still pretty abstract and confusing.

  • Cottage cheese, granola, and a little bit of jelly/ jam/ preserves (and coffee of course). Right now I'm using blueberry. It keeps me from being hungry for a few hours, which is good enough for me

  • No, not entirely.

    We have taxes taken out every paycheck that is kind of like an estimate of what you actually owe. At the end of the year, you file complicated paperwork to determine what you actually owe. Big tax companies lobby hard to keep it this way.

    For anything more complicated than a very basic life, people often use a tax company (like TurboTax or HR block) for help, which costs money. For even more complicated ones, people may use an accountant.

    It's a ridiculous system and the lobbyists keep it like that

  • Unfortunately, the history taught here (at least where I grew up, but I believe it is like this in most parts of the country) is so US-centric and pre-WWII topical that we didn't learn anything else. I don't think I learned about the Japanese internment camps until law school and I was in "advanced classes" throughout my pre-university years.

    Of course people would educate themselves outside of class, but there's a variety of reasons that doesn't really happen. It's quite sad and unfortunate we don't learn about the other atrocities (even those directly caused by the US). I wish it were different.

    Slightly off-topic, but we're not even taught the realities of our own history that we're supposedly taught about. Example: the civil war. If you ask many people in certain southern states (and surely some more northern ones too), the reasons they give for the war do not match reality. Or at least they do not come close to telling the whole story. The stranglehold on our education system is bonkers

  • How respectful of him to spell her name correctly /s

  • Columbia is speedrunning fastest university decline in the public eye

  • Thanks for this! I think it's the clearest visualization explanation I've ever heard for i

  • The white lotus. I didn't like season 3's theme as much as the first 2's but I still like to listen

  • There are age requirements for federal government positions and none of them are 40. President is 35, senator is 30, and house rep is 25.

  • $5/dozen for the average brand near Chicago (in Indiana), and $8/dozen i think for the more expensive brand

  • Sure, but I think the point is that raising minimum wage didn't cause that. Inflation (read: corporate greed) really harmed grocery, food, etc. prices, especially during the pandemic. It truly became a game of how much can we raise these prices until people consider not paying for it

  • That's right: usually. Sometimes no. Or sometimes the volume of water only slowly drains away (like some rivers move extremely slowly and it's almost as if it's not moving at all). If it takes 3 days for the water in the normally filled river to move 1 mile, even if it takes 2 days with the flooded valley to drain instead of 3, that's still 2 days of floods.

    Imagine you drop a bunched up shirt onto the floor. If you look, you'll see that there are lower spots surrounded on all sides of high spots. Terrain irl is not so different from that in spots. Hope this helps explain :)

  • If a 400 sq mi area gets 2 ft of rain and there's a low valley area surrounded mostly by mountains, the water will drain down the mountainsides to the valley. It's like a big bowl. The water that settles in the valley will be more than 2 ft because of the rest of the runoff from even higher elevations

  • Kroger next 👏👏

  • It depends how close you sit to your TV and how large the TV is. I can tell a difference if I'm close enough or if the screen is large enough. As well, try turning on a streamed 1080p show and using a 4k bluray (if you have all of thrsr things). When you stand close (like, closer than you'd watch), you can really see the difference. As you back away, it becomes less noticeable, but even at comfortable viewing distances people can see the difference

    You can see an example on your phone. Try watching a video in 1080p and then 480p. You should notice a difference, even if you hold your phone a foot from your face it's the same idea when watching on a tv.

  • There are some standards. The ingredients are listed in descending order of size (ie the first is the largest).

    They can get around this in a few ways (though this isn't really relevant here), such as for example preserves having this ingredient list: blueberries, sugar, corn syrup. Even though the amount of blueberries is technically larger than both sugar and corn syrup, sugar and corn syrup (still basically sugar) can add up to much more than the amount of blueberries. By including multiple types of sugar they can sort of hide the fact that the largest ingredient is some form of sugar