With the implementation of Patch v0.5.5 this week, we must make yet another compromise. From this patch onward, gliding will be performed using a glider rather than with Pals. Pals in the player’s team will still provide passive buffs to gliding, but players will now need to have a glider in their inventory in order to glide.

How lame. Japan needs to fix its patent laws, it's ridiculous Nintendo owns the simple concept of using an animal to fly.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

The student applies for a graduate program to get a degree, not get rich

And what's the big selling point behind why you would want to get a degree?

because it's an outlier.

Pre-pandemic public funding wasn't, which is why I linked a source that provided both so you could see how much of an outlier it was/wasn't.

If you go to the patent office and look at recent patents, I doubt a significant number are the result of government funding.

They all will be to some extent. The hard part is quantifying the extent for each individual patent. I can guarantee that you're company received/has received some sort of public funding and so yes the government does have involvement directly funding them, even if it isn't as explicit as with public health funding. Indirect funding is the much harder one to suss out but is likely significantly more.

Did Nintendo get government funding for its patents?

Directly? Probably not, but the whole point of bringing up universities was to show one of the indirect paths. However I don't speak Japanese in order to actually research but would be very curious to know what sort of subsidies/public assistance it receives, if there exists a thing similar to MEDIA/Creative Europe, etc.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

And what’s the big selling point behind why you would want to get a degree?

To work on interesting problems, that's why most people get advanced degrees, no? I highly doubt most people who get a Ph.D are in it for the money...

Indirect funding is the much harder one to suss out

It's also rarely directly related to R&D. For example, the company I work for produces chemical products, and innovations in that formulation is critical to our competitive advantage, but not particularly interesting from a national perspective. Our innovations merely help our products stand out from competitors, but competitor products are pretty similar.

If we get subsidies (haven't checked), it would be for producing these chemicals with less pollution, using locally produced ingredients, or to improve safety of transporting them.

If you try hard enough, yeah, you could probably find some form of government funding. But that doesn't mean the patents were produced as a direct result of public funding.

[–] SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

To work on interesting problems

If that's people's main motivator then why does copyright exist in the first place?

If we get subsidies

If you're a large enough institution to have as many patents as you claim to then I guarantee you do. I would encourage you to dig into that as well as the why.

that doesn't mean the patents were produced as a direct result of public funding.

How many transition steps are needed for a precursor chemical to no longer be a required precursor for a product? Is a byproduct that is sold not a product because it's not the primary intended production output?