RAFI:
MLAI/MLMLAI Copyright-Royal Courts "non-binding opinion" and NAACNs first decent article, and RTOS capability of NUS—Royal Court Advises against copyrighting cross-property content
Short answer: No.
->AmpoChem did end up asking whether Granhalia could copyright innovations generated by “NUS”. I was joking when I suggested this possibility.
–>The Royal Court used a “non-binding legal opinion”, which should always be understood as: “this will be how it would be decided if a case was brought forth”, essentially a warning.
–>It also remained silent on the matter of copyright regarding MLAI and MLMLAI generated content in general, which means that they’re leaving all options vague, purposefully. So they’ve essentially followed the principle of Redemptive Justice, as in creating ambiguity to such a degree that guilt emerges as a human response.
—NAACN: first good article, some errors
->This was covered more extensively by NAACN here, who for once made a good article, providing necessary context. However, there are still some mistakes.
–>In Granhalia portion, it uses “70-20-10% profit” – No. It is net revenue of Granhalia, not profit nor revenue.
Short: Nobility and Lumpenproletariat aren't socially mobile, they require additional criteria of hereditary titles for the former and "pathological deviance" for the latter. Open for that fun.
–>Regarding the class structure there are a few. Firstly, “somehow the clergy” suggests that the New Managerial Class isn’t essentially the same as the New Industrialist Class? NAACN likely purposefully made this mistake to make their class appear poorer than it actually is.
–>Regarding “Social mobility”, which is extremely high even within one generation, it does not include two of the six classes. Which require additional criteria other than median annual earning.
—>The Nobility is hereditary. Honorary titles, while they existing since Dorothy, is not the criteria used. The former criteria was being of the Peer House or a direct lesser vassal (Earl). Since Earls are now also hereditary, it’s the additional criteria.
—>The Lumpenproletariat includes the criteria of “pathological deviance”, which is an euphemism for: violent criminal records, hospitalisation due to repeated psychosis episodes, and the travelling circus… The last one stands out but it’s because they’ve been 6-8 nomadic groups dating back some 350 years and its origins are religious… “Behemothian Liberationists” were a heretic movement which arose as an extreme form of Adamites and performed circus plays as means of criticism. In the 1960s sexual liberation movement the travelling circus was also advocating for nudism…
—RTOS Capability of NAPA-OS-XX
->This is from Kons (Inc.) and PrototAutomaton meant in response to both Bahn 2030 Project of Eflad and to Rombolds Automation Plan of Izaakia.
—> While commending both ambitions, Kons (Inc.) informs Eflad, as an investor in our own infrastructural project, that PrototAutomatons’ NAPA-OS-XX includes necessary RTOS algorithm capabilities.
—>These have been around for a long time. They’re pretty necessary for any transportation terminal to function.
However, the fact that RTOS algorithms no longer require a separate OS is what PrototAutomaton kind of wants to flatter itself with. It also “Is open for sharing technological automation advancements with Rombold, after the economic commerce liberalisation is absolute.” (August 20th).
-Reporter: Lumen