My 14 year old son was frustrated with "Fun" math games as they were not really fun. So he started building his own games in p5.js and recently he launched these games at https://thegamebox.ca/
He has been making these games since he was 10yo, so there is a progression in quality. Last game he made is not a math game but a puzzle game (Red Remover) he used to play and love when he was very young and was no longer available.
He has done all the graphics as well for these games.
Just played through all the levels of Red Remover. Those were fun. Kudos to your son for not just making games but sharing them. At 14 I was just grinding away at World of Warcraft... didn't even touch programming or making games myself until I was in college.
This post is probably going to be flagged, like other Trump-related posts.
Teach your son that when people are afraid and uncertain about how they're going to feed their families, they become more nationalistic/xenophobic, and that sometimes manifests itself as racism. It's human nature, and it's happened many times in history. Much of Trump's racism is actually rooted in nationalism or protectionism, which isn't exactly the same as, for example, the enslavement of Africans in the US.
Nazi Germany arose the same way, due to the reparations the Germans were forced to pay after WWI. Why didn't it happen again? The Allies didn't force Germany to bankrupt its economy paying reparations after WWII.
Desperate people are dangerous. Due to the global recession and the decline of labor in the US, lots of people are desperate. Trump offers them hope. It's much more nuanced than Palpatine in Star Wars, who was so obviously evil, and it's something that's happened in every democratic society.
I think they are just going to offer it as open source software be a use you can get the Lego yourself. The software scans the picture and translates that to calendar input.
the last line on the post says it is an experiment and not a product.
Unfortunately, open source vs. commercial has nothing to do with whether something is a trademark infringement. The countless open-source fanworks taken down by brand-owning companies are a testament to this. As long as lawyers believe that "if you don't defend your trademark with takedowns, you'll lose the ability to defend it in court," then benign derivatives will not be able to use IP without licensing it in the general case.
few years ago, I started a site which had "lego" in its name. Even though it was actually promoting Lego and not at all commercial ( no Ads no fees ). I got a cease and desist letter from Lego Group, and they demanded that I hand over the domain to them.
I didn't want the trouble for a site which was not even making money for me, so I just transferred the domain to them.
FWIW, no need to be angry with them. The reason everyone with a trademark would react exactly the same way is because they have to, by law. If they don't, the court will argue that they haven't protected their trademark and they will loose it. Yes, this happens in real life.
Thank you very much. Perhaps I was wrong. This requirement seems to present an ongoing responsibility/burden for the trademark holder, so it makes no sense for anyone to do it.
Does that mean places that explicitly allow "fan fiction" derivative works that use the trademark, are placing themselves at risk of losing ownership of that trademark?
If so, that's very disappointing, as it would seem to be suppressing the ability of authors/creators to be generous with their creations.
"33. Google abandoned any trademark rights in Chromium software by failing to control the nature and quality of the open source software developed by others but at the same time permitting others to distribute the third party software under the Chromium mark".
Interesting; even though trademark holders need to enforce their rights, some are a little friendlier to deal with than others (www.ikeahackers.net is the site I have in mind)
It can actually be more X-inefficient (e.g spending indiscriminately) , because it has profits in the long run and won't go broke. I suspect the author was looking for the idea of cost, economies of scale lower average cost, hence increasing a firm's profits, not making workers more productive as he asserts.
