I don’t understand how this is getting approved.

Because you get promoted for changing things, not for keeping things the same. Almost every change like this is motivated by someone trying to get promoted.

“Right to work” refers to the fact that in those states, unions cannot force membership or payment, or force you to participate in labor strikes. You can still have a union in those states, but it’s very difficult for them to be effective because most people will choose not to pay into it, and strikes have significantly less bargaining power if there’s no legal obligation for union members to follow through with a strike.

The result is that in such states, there are very few unions, and so very few protections against firing workers for arbitrary reasons.

Unpopular opinion - I completely agree. In terms of cost per entertainment-hour, video games are by far the best value compared to similar media.

If you pay with your CC and sign the receipt after seeing the total, you’re going to have a very hard time getting it removed.

This is brilliant. Definitely going to try this tomorrow.

A good pair of pliers, like the Knipex Cobra.

It seems silly to be distrustful of proprietary BIOS firmware without having the same skepticism of the actual hardware.

Wow, I had no clue. TIL

All the claims except 8 are “obvious” IMO. Claim 8 fails novelty because of the huge amount of prior art on the matter.

Note that I’m using “novelty” and “obvious” according to their english definitions, and the intent of patent protection. If they’re different in practice, that’s a failing of current patent law.

For reference, here’s what I would consider to be a “good” software patent: https://patents.justia.com/patent/6721362

3 nanometer

That’s a silicon lattice just six atoms thick. What a time to be alive!

1. A locomotion system for controlling animation of a character in a three-dimensional (3D) virtual environment comprising: a rendering engine; a core system logic communicatively coupled to the rendering engine for executing core game logic of the virtual environment …

This is basically a description of a game engine that supports movement and animation. Descent (1994) would be the earliest production use of such an engine.

2. The locomotion system of claim 1, wherein a key identifies one or more variables of the blackboard, the key comprising a human readable name associated with the variables to provide the selection criteria.

Congratulations, you just described “variables”, a concept at least as old as ENIAC (1945).

3. The locomotion system of claim 1, wherein the core game logic defines one or more desired physical movements to sequence the motion type objects blocks.

Yes, that’s one way to describe “animation”

4. The locomotion system of claim 1, wherein a selected archetype block defines a fallback archetype block, the fallback archetype block defining at least one new motion animation block or motion type block not present in the selected archetype block and inheriting any remaining motion type blocks and motion animation blocks from the selected archetype block.

Variables having a default value is the default behavior of most programming languages and software systems.

5. The locomotion system of claim 1, wherein a selected archetype block defines the character’s default animation.

Yea, we’re talking about animation here. Default value of animation description = default animation.

6. The locomotion system of claim 1, wherein a selected archetype block of the character is unique from a second archetype block of a second character and at least one motion type block is common across the character and the second character.

Inheritance, a property of most software designs since the 1980s.

7. The locomotion system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the motion animation blocks, the motion type blocks, and the archetype blocks is defined by a series of extensible markup language (XML)-based meta files.

Storing configuration in a data file. You’d be hard pressed to find an alternative. Maybe some genius will come along and find some way to represent it in JSON…

8. The locomotion system of claim 1, wherein a selected attribute of a selected motion animation block includes at least one of a clip set that is used by a selected motion of the character, an overloadable animation blend tree to be used for the selected motion, named additional clips within specific clip sets, parametric blends from sets that can be named, a Boolean that specifies whether play speed of the selected motion can be modified, a minimum speed, and a maximum speed.

This seems to be the main claim of the patent, but seems to have a huge amount of prior art (see links). “Parametric blends” and other terms are just jargon.

9. The locomotion system of claim 1, wherein the attributes of the motion animation block are custom float values.

Oh my god. Really? Shall we also include “doubles”, “halfs”, or maybe “rationals”?

10. The locomotion system of claim 1, further comprising one or more transition tables to control a relationship between motion animation blocks.

“Translation table” seems to just be referring to the graph topology of the system. Yes, graphs are the most common way to represent arbitrary N:M relationships.

11. The locomotion system of claim 1, further comprising an in-game graphical user interface for real-time modification of at least one of the motion animation blocks, the motion type blocks, and the archetype blocks.

Node-based editing; standard practice in all 3D modeling.

12. A computer-implemented method for controlling animation of a character in a three-dimensional (3D) virtual environment comprising: executing core game logic to render the virtual environment using a core system logic communicatively coupled to a rendering engine …

Yes, you already described what a game engine is and an animation system is. Game engines certainly do have animation systems…

13. The computer-implemented method of claim 12, wherein said animating the character further comprises identifying a second archetype block, the common set of motion type blocks and the motion animation blocks of the second archetype block altering the animation of the character as a game story defined by the core game logic develops.

Picking animation keys based on game logic. What else would you base it on exactly?

14. The computer-implemented method of claim 12, wherein said animating the character further comprises identifying a fallback archetype block of the archetype block, the fallback archetype block defining at least one new motion animation block or motion type block not present in the selected archetype block and inheriting any remaining motion type blocks and motion animation blocks from the selected archetype block.

Yes, default values do be defaultin’.

15. A computer program product for controlling animation of a character in a three-dimensional (3D) virtual environment, the computer program product including a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a device to cause the device to perform a method comprising: executing core game logic to render the virtual environment using a core system logic communicatively coupled to a rendering engine …

Yep, software sure does run on computers. Computers are neat. And they have storage.

16. The computer program product of claim 15, wherein said animating the character further comprises identifying a second archetype block, the common set of motion type objects blocks and the motion animation blocks of the second archetype block altering the animation of the character as a game story defined by the core game logic develops.

Are we really going to enumerate all the permutations of engine + animation + defaults claims?

17. The computer program product of claim 15, wherein said animating the character further comprises identifying a fallback archetype block of the archetype block, the fallback archetype block defining at least one new motion animation block or motion type block not present in the selected archetype block and inheriting any remaining motion type objects blocks and motion animation blocks from the selected archetype block.

I guess we are…

TIL a single T-72B3 costs less than $2M.

Inference, yes. Training, no. Derived models don’t count.

If it was something you already did prior to filing and you could prove it then their case would be extremely flimsy

A brief search shows a variety of publications that seem to do what is described by the patent:

https://history.siggraph.org/learning/neural-animation-layering-for-synthesizing-martial-arts-movements-by-starke-zhao-zinno-and-komura/

https://advances.realtimerendering.com/destiny/siggraph2014/animation/index.html

https://www.cs.ucdavis.edu/~neff/papers/correlationMapsEG07.pdf

https://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/AnimationLayers.html

It’s definitely possible they’re doing something novel internally, but the details that would support that interpretation are missing from the filing. One of the requirements for patents is that it “sufficient disclosure of the invention so that it can be reproduced by others”. I would say I qualify as an expert in the domain covered, and I have no idea what they’re actually doing based on the patent alone.

I work in patents. If it wasn’t novel it wouldn’t be granted, believe me.

I work in computer graphics software. My former employer preferred that engineers liberally apply for “defensive” patents because of how often people would get a patent for something we already did and then try to sue us for it. Plus we got a small cash bonus when our patents were approved. Through this process, I was granted six patents for my work there. It would be unwise to put something to text that could be used as evidence to invalidate the patents, so I’ll just say that my opinion on how low the bar is to getting software patents approved is definitely well-informed.

understanding the law and understanding how to assess novelty in a proper way

I’ll admit I have little understanding of the legal definition of “novel”, but insofar as the intent of the patent system, the current bar is way too low for software patents. Although remedied recently, the plethora of software patents that still exist for “(Something people have done for decades) but do it on a computer” is ridiculous.

They’ve built a library of small building blocks for character movements. These blocks can be combined in various ways to create a wide range of animations. … Instead of designing separate animations for each of these situations, they use these building blocks to put together the character’s movements naturally.

This sounds like shape keys, which is a technique already widely used in games and animation today. When you get shot in Battlefield, your character model plays a “getting shot” animation. When your character runs, it plays a “running” animation. When your character gets shot while running, these two animations are combined - it’s not a separate “shot while running” animation.

Would love to know if there’s actually some novel aspect to this “invention” but it seems more likely that this is yet another bullshit patent approved by a clueless clerk who did zero searches for prior art.

Edit: Read the patent. Not only does it describe nothing novel, it doesn’t even document what they did. All it says is basically “we created animation blocks and combine them”. The details are just a bunch of bullshit jargon spew:

attributes can include conditions, properties, events, flags, graphs, values, references, and variants

I had a linux 5520 and it was terrible. Standby and bluetooth never worked properly. Are the new models any better?

I think it’s more like “snuck up on us” than any kind of nefarious connotation. Kind of like “how did a niche game like BG3 sneak into the top ten games list”?

Blocked by my employer’s security policies.