Probably Nintendo is suing on the catching mechanic which is pretty much the same in both games. In Palworld, the player has a team of Pals and, in order to catch a new Pal, they must fight and after some damage throw a catching ball at the right moment. Could someone patent a monster catching mechanic, anyway?

The capture mechanic was introduced all the way back in the first Pokemon game, which was released in 1996.

As patents only last 20 years, it should have expired years ago.

My understanding is that the patent must be filed before public demonstration (aka, the release of the game), or within a 1 year grace period, otherwise it's invalid.

There existed games that used that mechanic before Pokemon like Megami Tensei.

They should change it so you catch Pals by shooting at them. There, lawsuit avoided.

>The reply was it didn't break any policy.

What is the policy, as long as you pay and don't do anything outright offensive, it's all fair game?

The problem is that big companies don't want to broadcast their serious ad along scam ads¹. That is a serious treat for Youtube revenues.

¹ At least I wouldn't if I was doing ad campaigns of a big company, but maybe I'm naive...

The scams are a risk for some lawyer in some country suing YouTube. They bring in a lot of money now so YouTube is not interesting in policing them, but they are a risk that they will suddenly go away for legal reasons. which is why I don't understand why YouTube doesn't police them now - between the potential loss in court and the big companies staying away there is a lot of risk to YouTube.

Note too that if YouTube would police scam ads better they would have a better message to various countries that laws and legal action is not needed at all. Right now I'm shocked the EU hasn't put in place harsh laws about ads - if YouTube would police their own ads they could have a slightly less harsh policy in place and thus make it not worth while for the EU to pass the harsh law they don't like.

While this must be an incredible technical achievement for the team, as a simple user I will only see value when Google ships a product that's better than OpenAI's, and that's yet to be seen.

It's not like that's something new or exclusive to tech, right? Coke had cocaine and cigarettes were physician tested and approved. We should have learned from those things but we didn't, and so history will rhyme.

>Coke had cocaine

We removed the wrong additive...

I can't speak about Google at all, but this line: if you’re not in the room when decisions are made you don’t know how the company works

Is great and true, thank you.

Leadership is remarkably good at explaining what are wholly self-serving decisions in corpspeak, which everyone gets a laugh about on memegen, but then they still buy the most outlandish justifications hook-line-and-sinker.

this changes everything (if it's true)

Beazley is one of the masters and his other books are great. My nitpick here is that, as in any other language, the basics are there forever and the advanced features/techniques get old and replaced every now and then.

Creating a problem and selling the solution, a classical politician's move.

I used to really like Gandi. I still have a t-shirt with their #no_bullshit slogan that's from 2015-16. It's been a couple of years since I stopped having any need for their services, and its sad to see them dropping the ball like this.