• 0 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle


  • Amju Wolf@pawb.socialtoTechnology@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    No, it’s not “Windows-like” in anything but some basic appearance (and that would be Windows from the previous decade). It’s not similar in anything else, and from my experience the similarity in appearance only confuses users.

    I really wish people stopped recommending Mint as if it was some proper Windows replacement because it’s overall a very mediocre distro that’s IMO more likely to detract users from using Linux than anything else.


  • Protecting innovative stuff is literally the point of patents and why the system exists. Anything “new” is by definition innovation, except the bar is really low currently, with very little research being done into prior art.

    Patented stuff should be non-obvious, and not a simple derivative of existing stuff (i.e. when there are square buttons and circle buttons you shouldn’t be able to patent a button that has 2 corners square and 2 circle just because it’s “novel” because it’s just a very simple and logical step).

    So basically, make the bar for a patent much higher, and require some proof into the research of prior art and explaining why/how your patent is different.

    Also, patents should expire early/not be renewable if you don’t actually use them (so move a certain number of units / generate some amount of revenue using your patents). So you couldn’t patent random BS in the hopes someone else will break your patent by accident.

    Or even better, just outright punish patent trolls.


  • Patents would be fine if the bar for “innovation” would be much higher, software patents weren’t a thing, there was way more research done into prior art, and there would be different (shorter) lengths for patents depending on what industry they target.

    Like, if it’s manufacturing or something like drugs where it takes years before you can start making profit, sure, make them 10-20 years. If it’ something you make money off of immediately, it should be shorter.


  • Amju Wolf@pawb.socialtoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Yeah, it’s also that “it just works” now, and one undisputable (though unfortunately self-fulfilling) advantage of Windows is that chances are if you do encounter an issue you’re not the first one and someone has already solved it.

    Being an early(ish) adopter of anything like that is always a bit of a risk and pain.




  • Amju Wolf@pawb.socialtoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Since arbitrations are charged a fee per customer someone figured out that you can do an effective “class action” against valve by having many people submit the same arbitration claim against valve and costing them so much through the arbitration fees that it it was almost impossible for them to cone out on top regardless of the outcome of the arbitration (iirc).

    It’s not even that they’d have to pay for it; usually the filing party has to pay. Valve tried to be the good guys and while they did push for arbitration they said that they’d pay your arbitration fee for you, basically allowing you to file a legal complaint against them at their expense.

    And then some fucking legal company figured out it’s a neat loophole on how to bleed them through arbitration where the point isn’t really the result but the costly process. Guess that’ll teach Valve to try to be better than others. :|