Zenimax has already stated that John took no code or documents with him. This is about their right to patent an idea in the future if it looks like it might be a money maker. Other companies are supposed to know that they might want to patent the idea and stay away from it. Why Zenimax didn't just, you know, file for the patents is a question they have not answered.
If you could somehow break the runaway greenhouse effect on Venus it would be by far the best colonization option in the solar system outside of maybe the Moon (and only because the Moon is relatively close to us).
I have not done the math, but a good start might be slamming the mother of all comets into the planet to both blow most of the atmosphere away and to introduce a planet's worth of liquid water. Then dump massive amounts of engineered plankton on the planet to start fixing the CO2 and also start creating a biosphere. We're talking about a several thousand (probably million) year project here, but it's a lot easier than trying to ship and atmosphere over to Mars.
Yes, I agree that this administration is on the right side of history, but this is very annoying to people who elected them to be on the left! It's pretty annoying when the only two realistic candidates are the right and far right candidates.
Who else would be involved? This is the FAA's jurisdiction. I agree that this is a non-story as well. If you're recklessly operating an aircraft and might be putting people in danger, then yes, that should be against the law and a fine is quite appropriate.
As I understand it, the engine is nice enough to develop on, but Zenimax won't license it to anybody so it doesn't matter. This creates another problem where there is no mass of developers and foundation of knowledge around the engine, so anybody using it now would face early adopter hurdles.
They're claiming that he stole the knowledge in his head. Basically their claim boils down to: we own John Carmack forever, because he learned stuff while on the clock for Zenimax.
Trade Secrets don't have much protection under the law. That's kind of the point. In order to be protected you have to prove that you're willing to advance the public good (otherwise there is no public interest), but that requires disclosure and limited protections (they expire). So it's a tradeoff, either you keep it secret, or you make it public and get protections from the law. Obviously this was written before our current era of government as the enforcement arm of corporate policy, but it's still grandfathered in.
They're allowed to charge whatever they want. And I'm allowed to laugh at them when it's an utter failure. Then they're allowed to call me a dirty thief because I didn't buy their product and must therefore be stealing it, and the cycle of media asshole behavior continues.
How is an app supposed to know that you're driving and not the passenger in a car? Also, as everybody else noted: every single cellphone has a silent feature. There's no need for an app.
In fact an app that has a subscription service to simply not use the phone while driving? That's bordering on fraud.
I would think the hash handle would already be a pointer in most cases. So it's hash_add(hash, key, value). More keystrokes than the Perl version for sure, but not exactly razor blades to the eye. Not like what happens in Perl when you try to create complex data structures and pass them to functions. Granted, that same problem isn't a picnic in C either, but C is better at keeping a lid on the exploding syntax and is a lot easier to grok from just looking at the code. I weep for a perl newbie who is asked to deal with a reference to a hash of arrays. The syntax isn't particularly difficult, but it's very unintuitive.
The CEO isn't the guy who does the technical work. His job is to find money for the company and provide vague "direction". Pixel counts are totally beneath him. He'll be consulted for big business decisions, and his opinion carries weight, but he's not as likely as a rank and file guy to know the exact technical details of some proposal. He undoubtedly got the "managers version" of the brief himself, and is regurgitating that.
I also think this is a stupid idea. Has any customer ever looked at a DRM scheme and gone "I like this, but it needs to be more complicated and expensive." The only DRM schemes that people tolerate are the ones that you don't see.
Yeah, there is no chance a 911 call could come from a pay phone (although this avenue is becoming quite scarce over time) or a burner cellphone or IP phone behind 7 proxies. The Supreme Court has basically just opened another door on swatting people.
Given the number of fabrication shops that have closed or gone overseas and laid off welders in the past two decades, I find it highly suspicious that companies can't find people to fill their positions. Is this like the H1B "crisis" where Silicon Valley firms can't find tech workers anywhere locally, but it turns out they're asking for DBA administrators with 15 years of experience on 5 different platforms plus 10 years coding experience with 8 different languages and can sysadmin server clusters that are willing to start people at $40k/year? I mean yeah, that guy in India said he could do it at that price, why can't we bring him over here?
Slashdot Mirror
And those are always the worst books. You know you're in trouble when you get a book and it is typeset in Computer Modern.
No, they're setting their weapons on autofire so they don't have to click.
Zenimax has already stated that John took no code or documents with him. This is about their right to patent an idea in the future if it looks like it might be a money maker. Other companies are supposed to know that they might want to patent the idea and stay away from it. Why Zenimax didn't just, you know, file for the patents is a question they have not answered.
If you could somehow break the runaway greenhouse effect on Venus it would be by far the best colonization option in the solar system outside of maybe the Moon (and only because the Moon is relatively close to us).
I have not done the math, but a good start might be slamming the mother of all comets into the planet to both blow most of the atmosphere away and to introduce a planet's worth of liquid water. Then dump massive amounts of engineered plankton on the planet to start fixing the CO2 and also start creating a biosphere. We're talking about a several thousand (probably million) year project here, but it's a lot easier than trying to ship and atmosphere over to Mars.
Yes, I agree that this administration is on the right side of history, but this is very annoying to people who elected them to be on the left! It's pretty annoying when the only two realistic candidates are the right and far right candidates.
RC Cars and Basketballs are not aircraft.
Who else would be involved? This is the FAA's jurisdiction. I agree that this is a non-story as well. If you're recklessly operating an aircraft and might be putting people in danger, then yes, that should be against the law and a fine is quite appropriate.
As I understand it, the engine is nice enough to develop on, but Zenimax won't license it to anybody so it doesn't matter. This creates another problem where there is no mass of developers and foundation of knowledge around the engine, so anybody using it now would face early adopter hurdles.
They're claiming that he stole the knowledge in his head. Basically their claim boils down to: we own John Carmack forever, because he learned stuff while on the clock for Zenimax.
Trade Secrets don't have much protection under the law. That's kind of the point. In order to be protected you have to prove that you're willing to advance the public good (otherwise there is no public interest), but that requires disclosure and limited protections (they expire). So it's a tradeoff, either you keep it secret, or you make it public and get protections from the law. Obviously this was written before our current era of government as the enforcement arm of corporate policy, but it's still grandfathered in.
The recipe for Coke has been known forever. The whole "secret recipe" is all a big marketing gimmick.
I have a tough time seeing this fly in a court that is already hostile to non-compete agreements.
They're allowed to charge whatever they want. And I'm allowed to laugh at them when it's an utter failure. Then they're allowed to call me a dirty thief because I didn't buy their product and must therefore be stealing it, and the cycle of media asshole behavior continues.
How is an app supposed to know that you're driving and not the passenger in a car? Also, as everybody else noted: every single cellphone has a silent feature. There's no need for an app.
In fact an app that has a subscription service to simply not use the phone while driving? That's bordering on fraud.
I would think the hash handle would already be a pointer in most cases. So it's hash_add(hash, key, value). More keystrokes than the Perl version for sure, but not exactly razor blades to the eye. Not like what happens in Perl when you try to create complex data structures and pass them to functions. Granted, that same problem isn't a picnic in C either, but C is better at keeping a lid on the exploding syntax and is a lot easier to grok from just looking at the code. I weep for a perl newbie who is asked to deal with a reference to a hash of arrays. The syntax isn't particularly difficult, but it's very unintuitive.
There's a line I was not expecting to read today.
The CEO isn't the guy who does the technical work. His job is to find money for the company and provide vague "direction". Pixel counts are totally beneath him. He'll be consulted for big business decisions, and his opinion carries weight, but he's not as likely as a rank and file guy to know the exact technical details of some proposal. He undoubtedly got the "managers version" of the brief himself, and is regurgitating that.
I also think this is a stupid idea. Has any customer ever looked at a DRM scheme and gone "I like this, but it needs to be more complicated and expensive." The only DRM schemes that people tolerate are the ones that you don't see.
Tell that to the original developers of screen...
Does it finally handle curses applications properly? Or does the screen management still get mangled?
That the current supreme court's decisions almost invariably side with the bigger business currently. By the way, Aereo is fucked.
I'm not surprised by this ruling at all. The current Supreme Court is very friendly towards businesses acting badly.
Certainly you're not talking about the C=64 power supplies that were notorious for burning out after only about a year of moderate use?
Yeah, there is no chance a 911 call could come from a pay phone (although this avenue is becoming quite scarce over time) or a burner cellphone or IP phone behind 7 proxies. The Supreme Court has basically just opened another door on swatting people.
Given the number of fabrication shops that have closed or gone overseas and laid off welders in the past two decades, I find it highly suspicious that companies can't find people to fill their positions. Is this like the H1B "crisis" where Silicon Valley firms can't find tech workers anywhere locally, but it turns out they're asking for DBA administrators with 15 years of experience on 5 different platforms plus 10 years coding experience with 8 different languages and can sysadmin server clusters that are willing to start people at $40k/year? I mean yeah, that guy in India said he could do it at that price, why can't we bring him over here?
P2P won't help your goal of using less bandwidth however.