This already exists, especially in the outer boroughs. But of course I'd love to see more of it!
1,507 karma · joined May 14, 2020
> To plead a claim of fraud, petitioner must plead that: (1) respondent made a false representation to the USPTO; (2) respondent had knowledge of the falsity of the representation; (3) the false representation was material to the continued registration of the mark, and (4) respondent made the representation with the intent to deceive the USPTO.
> A claim of fraud must set forth all elements of the claim with a heightened degree of particularity [...] Indeed, “the pleadings [must] contain explicit rather than implied expressions of the circumstances constituting the fraud.” In addition, intent to deceive the USPTO is a specific element of a fraud claim, and must be sufficiently pleaded
> Essentially, Petitioner’s theory of fraud is based on allegations that the specimen of use submitted with Respondent’s maintenance documents do not show use by the proper party. It is well-settled that the proper ground for cancellation is the underlying question of whether the mark was in use in commerce, not the adequacy of the specimens [...] the insufficiency of the specimens, per se, does not constitute grounds for cancellation; the proper ground for cancellation is that the term has not been used as a mark
To file for a mark or renewal of a mark and claim ownership of something you do not own is insane. It's not like this is a 5 second process or that there isn't a lot of money riding on this-- this sort of thing is super serious and incredibly important! You're telling me no one at Oracle or their counsel was able to catch this in review before filing? As far as I can tell, in the renewal for the mark[1], Node.js was the sole specimen provided as an example of mark use! Come on...
EDIT: Sorry, correction, they have three specimens attached to the renewal, two of which seem to be the same. Clearly an insurmountable amount of work and too complicated to validate.
[0]: https://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92086835&pty=CAN&eno...
[1]: https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn75026640&docI...
I dumped $110 into it over the course of a day, just to give it a fair shake and see how far I could bring it. The first $40 or so was pretty productive and I had a cool little prototype. The last $70, however, was basically stuck in a death loop where it couldn't fix certain (obvious) problems.
It would read my feedback, do some tests (this feature is super cool by the way), and then declare that everything works. I would then click through the UI, see that nothing changed, and then reprompt. It would declare that, indeed, there is an error! It would go about on a tangent trying to solve it, declare victory, and then give a cutsey update about how it solved the issue. I then test, see that nothing changed, and then reprompt... ad infinitum (or at least until I stopped putting tokens in the machine). Honestly, now that I think about it, it feels like I paid these guys to get the standard Product Manager experience.
Of course, I can't be too harsh. This has been pretty much my experience with most AI products. I was hoping the way Phoenix.new was set up (where it plans it's work and tests itself) would achieve better results, but that seems not to really make a difference.
I think we're well beyond the point where the majority of people cannot tell what is actually produced by an LLM and we're convincing ourselves we still have a handle on the situation. A lot of these rules are completely arbitrary and vary from person to person.
Not trying to be snarky, genuinely curious what the sales pitch is here.
15 years later, I'm in my 30s and I cannot even look at most modern 3D games. First-person games are an absolute no-go and third-person games are a toss-up. I missed out on a ton of games[1] and had to drop quite a few[2]. The ones I completed, I did so by forcing myself through the nausea[3]. I've even tried to go back to games I used to play[4] and even those kill me. It is really bad and at this point I mostly just play 2D games like Caves of Qud or top-down/isometric games like Disco Elysium.
The accessibility options in a lot of these games do help a bit, but it is never 100%. I usually turn things like camera shake/head bob off, lower graphics settings, tone down particles, mess around with FOV, adding a center dot... the whole kit and caboodle. At this point I'm not really sure if there is anything else that could be done to help me out, but I still really appreciate it when devs think about people with motion sickness issues.
[1]: Never even touched Overwatch or PUBG
[2]: I wish I could finish DOOM 2016 and Armored Core 6
[3]: The Witness and all those Resident Evil remakes have caused me countless hours of joy and pain, Elden Ring was mostly fine but some sessions I had to stop early
[4]: I will probably never beat HL2 again
OpenAI has made the argument in the past that it couldn't exist without utilizing copyrighted works without permission and, as a net good for humanity, they should get a pass. Old dusty laws and authors rights should clearly take a backseat to innovation!
... except now the shoe is on the other foot where suddenly it's bad to use things without permission. If you were a proponent of AI and AI accelerationism then this should still be kosher since the "net good" has increased with a completely open source model that is apparently considerably more efficient.
The only remaining line of defense amounts to censorship concerns and/or "China bad," as if OpenAI also doesn't do the same and the US was a geopolitical darling.
On Bluesky they just apply a label and users are free to toggle it as show/warn/hide. At least, this is what I've personally experienced using the site.
I joked that I'm always cautious about machines like this, even knowing the dosage of radiation is low, simply because of the history of software safety controls and the story of Therac-25. She hadn't heard of it before and I gave her the gist of it, that an issue with the programming made it so it was possible to accidentally dose a patient considerably more than the intended amount (in a few different ways). It was interesting to her but I then had to pause so she could run the machine. I shut up and she did her thing.
Then, after a few minutes of scanning, she sucked her teeth a bit and apologized, saying she needed to run it once more. No worries, let's get it done! She starts it again and as I'm getting scanned she explains that "for whatever reason I was getting an error so I just had to restart it, this happens sometimes and I'm not really sure why." I give a little half-nervous chuckle and then the scan completes. Once I pull my head out of the machine, I finally get to finish my lovely Therac-25 story wherein I explain that one of the issues was... a combination of non-descriptive error codes, insufficient failsafes, and operator error resulting in patient casualties as the procedure was restarted one or more times.
We shared a little laugh and discussed other things, cost of living primarily. I'm still alive so I'm at least 63% sure I didn't get megadosed or anything but its been a funny conversation to revisit now and then.
- An incredibly grandiose claim that this would've "fixed global payments at scale"
- Complaints about the "slow play" as they have to comply with regulations that everyone else in that industry also must comply with
- A reason based entirely hearsay, yet with the bold claim it was "100% a political kill"
- The Fed didn't actually say that banks can't use the technology, but rather that they aren't comfortable with it
- The actual point of the post was to promote a new crypto startup
I don't walk away convinced that the big bad government killed innovation here; if the company with a $1.5 trillion market cap pushing this project really wanted to, they would've continued pursuing it.
I don't have a favorable opinion of DeVault (though it's been slightly warming the past few years), but this just seems forced.
I do not want to roundtrip for something that shouldn't have left my house in the first place. Their older products allowed me to keep it local, why shouldn't their newer ones?
[0]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1888 [1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3407
I have to wonder what systems other countries use for identifying citizens and how secure they are compared to SSNs.
Now if only we could somehow get MoR for marketplaces...
Async as a paradigm has probably created billions of dollars in that it's allowed many many many developers to reasonably scale beyond what they could've otherwise.