Fighting linguistic trends, insisting on tradition. Drake pushing aside, pain in his face. Embracing and extending, finding the new path forward. Drake with a knowing smile, pointing a finger in admiration.
5,264 karma · joined July 17, 2008
From everything I've been able to find, it was building code amnesty, in effect. The proliferation of these laws in Turkey, dating back all the way to the 1940s, created a culture where builders could basically build what they want, without the necessary permits/code enforcement, confident in the knowledge that they would fall under the next decree of amnesty and never be required to fix it.
"...more than 50 percent of the buildings in Turkey were constructed in violation of the current building code... Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects (TMMOB) Ankara branch chair Selim Tulumtaş warned .. that the legislation put the lives of 2.7 million people across the country at risk since they live in shoddily constructed buildings." https://www.turkishminute.com/2023/02/13/turkey-construction...
"Do no not grind the glow powder or try and dissolve it. On a microscopic level, the glow powder works by an energy exchange in its crystalline structure. These crystals are very small and just appear like a fine powder. When they are mixed with a clear medium as we do with our glow paint, the glow powder does not dissolve, it is just suspended in the medium. If you mix the powder with a medium that causes it to break down and dissolve (like water), the glow will be ruined. The same thing will happen if you grind the glow powder. You crush and destroy the crystal matrix and the energy will not be able to transfer between the glow material molecules causing a dramatic drop in glow brightness."
* Begins with a slight rewording of your question, rephrased as the introduction to the answer
* Ends with at least a sentence or two of CYA-type caveats, like "ultimately it will depend on", "there are many factors", etc.
* Writes in full sentences even when not really necessary - eg. this bullet point would be phrased as "Text generated by a language model would be more likely than average to be written in full sentences..."
* Avoids pronouns when any ambiguity is present, even if it would be obvious to a human. eg. If the first sentence is: "Robert and Joe were playing football when Joe injured his hand", a human might continue: "He tried to keep playing but it hurt too badly." ChatGPT would be more like: "Joe tried to keep playing but his hand hurt too badly".
(this was NOT written by ChatGPT :)
I’m sure this is a calculated risk, they probably feel confident in their ability to detect unauthorized attempts to read the tags.
"(1) similarity of the marks; (2) strength of plaintiff's mark; (3) sophistication of consumers when making a purchase; (4) intent of defendant in adopting the mark; (5) evidence of actual confusion (or lack thereof); (6) similarity of marketing and advertising channels; (7) extent to which the targets of the parties’ sales efforts are the same; (8) product similarity; identity/function/use; and (9) other factors suggesting that consumers might expect the prior owner to manufacture both products, or expect the prior owner to manufacture a product in defendants market, or expect the prior owner is likely to expand into defendant’s market."
While true that IKEA has a strong brand and the in-game store uses very similar branding, they lose on every other factor. It is very unlikely that anyone will reasonably wonder if the game is an IKEA product, or officially sponsored by IKEA. Unfortunately it sounds like the developer doesn't have the resources to defend it, so they'll likely be bullied into changing it unless they get some pro bono legal counsel.
FWIW it made perfect sense to me. It's a fun and thought-provoking analogy.