Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Phrodo_00's comments login

Both games only really ripped off Nintendo's aesthetics, with not that much similarity in gameplay.

That’s a load-bearing “only”.

Lots of cope in these replies. You can easily look up youtube comparisons of these games to see how similar they are, even mechanically in many cases.


You can go all the way back to when Facebook was the dominant gaming platform to realize how much leeway there is: what actually got Vostu in trouble - privately settling that is - was copying so blatantly they "inherited" bugs from Zynga.

https://techcrunch.com/2011/06/16/war-zynga-sues-the-hell-ou...

https://techcrunch.com/2011/07/20/vostu-goes-on-the-offensiv...

https://techcrunch.com/2011/12/06/zynga-vostu-settle-copyrig...


There's this, and also, trucker unions put a lot of pressure against rail.

Drive slow and don't go up curbs (there's generally people there!)?

Betteridge's law of headlines strikes again!

> Weirdly enough, there aren't even roads connecting the southernmost part of Chile to the north without taking a detour through Argentina,

Not that weird. The country pretty much becomes an archipelago + ice field south of Coyhaique.


Yeah and no? Python Lists indeed don't make any sort of array-like guarantee, but they're implemented as a vector/autogrowing-array of python object references (but these objects are not guaranteed to be cache-local).

The implementation defines the underlying data structure as PyObject *ob_item


List access is O(1), which effectively makes them arrays :)


Maybe if you don't consider CPU architecture, but most would expect to be able to do loops over Arrays that don't incur in a lot of cache misses, and Python Lists don't do that, since they're actually arrays of pointers to heap memory.


It really depends of when the expectation is set. Amazon right now has a combination of people hired when:

* Teams when working 5 days in office, but nobody checked (other than maybe your direct manager) and you could wfh if you needed it to

* Teams were completely remote

* Amazon was checking you came to the office 3 times in the week

* Amazon was checking you came to the office 3 times a week for a certain amount of time

And now the expectation is completely different to all of those. Again.


> I have never actually heard from a single person who wanted to force remote people in

I have. lots of people get a lot of their social interaction from work.


An englishman, a scotsman and an irishman are marooned on a desert island. Afer a long year one of them finds a lamp, and when cleaning it up a genie appears.

The genie offers them one wish each

The Irishman says 'sure i'd give anything to be back in galway, stuck in a snug, with a pint of porter' and <poof> he's gone.

The scotsman is amazed and roars 'take me back tae glasgae!' and in a similar puff of smoke is gone.

The englishman, looks around and says 'I say, its going to be awfully lonely around here without those chaps around, can you bring them back please?'


Yeah, I'm not sure what the OP is talking about. There's definitely a sense of irritation at my office when you've got 4/5 people in office for a meeting and we have to dial in to talk to the 5th who is remote, especially when they could have come in.


I wouldn't really say very differently. Residential AC and Heat Pumps are available in pretty the same spec range. You can make an AC by removing/replacing some parts from a Heat pump and that's what some manufacturers do, meaning they're literally almost the same (except for the reversing valve, accumulator, outside meter and defrosting and some other small stuff)


I'm guessing you're not a lawyer, and I'm not either, so there might be some details that are not obvious about it, but the regulation draws the line at allowing you to do[1]:

> any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected

I think that allows your use case without liability.

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230


That subsection of 230 is about protecting you from being sued for moderating, like being sued by the people who posted the content you took down.

The "my moderation makes me liable for everything I don't moderate" problem, that's what's addressed by the preceding section, the core of the law and the part that's most often at issue, which says that you can't be treated as publisher/speaker of anyone else's content.


Wow, "or otherwise objectionable" would seemingly give providers a loophole wide enough to drive a truck through.


It's not a loophole. That's the intended meaning, otherwise it would be a violation of freedom of association.

That doesn't mean anyone is free to promote content without liability, just that moderating by deleting content doesn't make it an "expressive product."


Both are protected, because both are 1A activity.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: