You can only defend your trademark with respect to product categories that you actually market. Unless IKEA were in the business of selling parody video games, their trademark doesn't apply.
Wait... is that why IKEA just put out a parody video game?
The game is not itself a store or advertising a real store. It is an entirely different product category. Parody is still legal and allowed as fair use, the likeness is the point. This is hardly the most egregious example that I have seen.
Ultimately, these matters would likely be decided in court. IANAL either but it seems like the game maker would have a strong case. Among the things IKEA would have to prove is actual harm and confusion, who would seriously argue that? That doesn't mean IKEA couldn't make it impossible to fight with their unlimited legal resources, I can understand not wanting to spend a chunk of your life on that.
Two things can be true at once: this is the most creative marketing in recent memory and genuinely funny, and IKEA destroyed someone's work simply because they can.
You can also defend it against tarnishment. They can argue that IKEA appearing in a violent video game has negative associations with their trademarks.
He talks about how agents/delegates extend the agency of the people who operate them. And “almost all of society is premised on the fact that agency is scarce”. But software agents grant vastly more agency.
The thing that stops the worst people from annoying the hell out of you is that they lack the agency to do so. But now…
To be fair to yourself, the fact that C# terminates pending tasks when the main method exits is something most C# devs don’t have to deal with because they’re mostly working in the context of long running servers and apps.
> destroyed the yardstick … that has traditionally been used to measure how much they have contributed
This goes much broader than mathematics or academia. This is the entire basis via which society distributes its wealth: based on a labour market derived valuation of ‘contribution’.
> This is the entire basis via which society distributes its wealth: based on a labour market derived valuation of ‘contribution’.
Correction: that's not how society distributes its wealth, it's how it throws some bones to the masses. I wouldn't be surprised if over half the wealth goes to people who don't sell their labor at all.
You’re portraying a lot of these things as if they exist in a continuum along a fuzzy line from ‘not cheating’ to ‘cheating’, but the reality is it isn’t fuzzy at all. It’s cheating to submit work you didn’t do for assessment as if it is your own. That is cut and dried cheating.
It’s not so much ‘we are not in a position to verify’ as the fact that the person who said the thing, and what they said, is itself newsworthy.
If you’re reporting that “Government sources say Houthis have ‘taken control’ of an island” then the fact that government sources used the words ‘taken control’ is itself interesting.
The headlines “Russia ‘will be defeated’ in Ukraine says Zelensky”, “Russia ‘will be defeated’ in Ukraine says Putin”, and “Russia ‘will be defeated’ in Ukraine says Taylor Swift” all tell of vastly different news events.
Of course the best way to have your ideas dismissed is to label them a ‘manifesto’, but there’s some interesting ideas in here.
I’m particularly struck by the fear that we might be becoming less collaborative as developers turn away from one another and into chats with AI assistants - the idea of bringing those assistants out into the collaborative environment is compelling. Invite the agent to the meeting.
The fact that work is retreating into private chat sessions with AI agents is a loss; the idea of bringing those agentic collaborators out into public spaces to collaborate with teams is interesting.
We have the same. Do you know why the ‘every audio connector known to man’ box contain every audio connector known to man but yet never a stereo 1/8” headphone-jack to headphone-jack cable?
I've routed around that problem with several RCA-to-Stereo plugs for "when in a pinch" (and their natural reverse, the "stereo-to-RCA") but am still stymied sometimes by the difference between the different 2.5mm and 3.5mm spacings for microphone support. Supposedly I must keep an eye out for "a TRRS-to-dual-TRS splitter cable to fork the signals into their respective ports"... Tip/Ring/Ring/Sleeve, who knew??!?
don't know any audio engineers? If your bboc is simply a mishmash of things you've accumulated over the years, and not intelligently designed, it won't, but don't make the mistake of extrapolating from your own experience and thinking it applies to everybody.
Wait... is that why IKEA just put out a parody video game?
reply