Would love to have a ergonomic hall effect keyboard!
I daily drive the Moonlander, both for work and gaming, and it's honestly really good. Would be awesome to get a similar keyboard but with magnetic keys.
First time browsing this website, and it seems like an amazing project!
I particularly like that they link to places where you can purchase a song or album. As someone who's considering streaming my music from a local server, those links could come in real handy!
Though it is worthing that Nintendo is alleging patent infringement, not copyright infringement. IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer), but that doesn't sound like they're going after the models used in Palworld, but more overall mechanics?
Possibly this patent Nintendo has for what seems to be "a thing the player throws at another thing to initiate a fight with it" (IANAL): https://patents.justia.com/patent/20240278129
WB patent the Nemesis system which boiled down is "a system where bosses evolve and get strong based on player interaction'. A patent they have pretty much not used and prevented other games from developing similar interactions.
Patents in gaming are weird and suck hard. They stifle innovation and growth. Games have evolved and grown on the backs of previous games forever.
Patents everywhere are weird and suck hard. They stifle innovation and growth. Human knowledge has evolved and grown on the back of other human knowledge forever.
That’s so bad. You should be able to patent specific rules to protect your game or like board game and avoid people from copy pasting it. But you shouldn’t be able to patent such broad mechanics…
It's a hint that this patent is probably not a direct reaction to Palworld. And it means that we are lacking a significant amount of information regarding the whole history of these patents. Quite possible that they indeed have a trail of patents going back for decades, and this is just the latest addition.
Man, I'm really tired of patents and copyright. I'm not sure what's supposed to come out of this. Nobody is allowed to make a Pokemon-like game anymore? Who does that benefit other than Nintendo/TPC?
is there a clause in US patent law where if you choose to either selectively enforce your patents, or not enforcing them for a while then suddenly starting to do so, invalidates your patent?
Oh, I am nothing but liberal when it comes to CSV: Clients get the liberty to either have their requests processed, or get a 400 BAD REQUEST
And yes, I am aware that the standard says this. My counter question to that is: How much client-liberty do I have to accept? Where do I draw the line? How much is too much liberty?
And the answer is: there is no answer. Wherever any system draws that line, it's an arbitrary decision; Except for one, which ensures the least surprise and maximum interoperability (aka. the point of a standard): to be "conservative", and simply demand the standard.
I think the suggestion reflected a deep understanding that transitioning from decades of wild-west to standardized in the smooth fashion most likely to succeed would require that strategy.
If you don’t accept whatever some org’s data is encoded with, they won’t consider it a win for standards, or swap out whatever is producing that data for something more compliant. They’ll consider it a bug, and probably use some other more flexible processor.
On the other hand, if you can be flexible enough to allow quirks on import while not perpetuating them on export, eventually you and other software built with the same philosophy standardize the field.
I do think there’s a point where things are standardized enough that you can safely stop doing that—when all the extra quirk code is so rarely used as to be irrelevant—but I’m unsure if we’ve reached it yet. It would be something to actually analyze, though, rather than just a philosophical decision.
> On the other hand, if you can be flexible enough to allow quirks on import while not perpetuating them on export, eventually you and other software built with the same philosophy standardize the field.
How? The only thing I can see happening is perpetuation of sloppy use of standards. "Why, why should I change my |-deliminated CSV dialect that requires a double-semicolon at the end of each row, which is arbitrarily denoted by either \n or \r or \n\r when all those programmers will accomodate me, no matter how little sense it makes to do so?
> I do think there’s a point where things are standardized enough that you can safely stop doing that
I agree. And that point was when someone sat down, and penned RFC-4180
Everything after that point, has to justify why it isn't RFC compliant, not the other way around.
The SQLite author says in the last paragraph of the sqlite-kit issue:
"You are welcomed to use "SQLite" as part of the name for your software, so that people know that it uses SQLite. For example, you might call your software "SQLite Wrapper for Swift" or "Vapor's Swift SQLite Wrapper". But you may not use the unqualified name "SQLite"."
But an instant drawback I see is keyboard accessibility.
The focused element is lost whenever you navigate to a new page, meaning I have to tab all the way through the menu again to get to where I was.
An example: I tab 4 times to get to the open menu "button", press enter, and then I have to tab 4 times again to actually enter the menu.