What makes you think either will happen. This is the post 9-11 world! They will call in every agency they can think of including the forest service and then blow the briefcase up in a big spectacle.
Once they find out it was harmless they will seek to prosecute the owner for whatever they can get to stick for the crime of making them look like raving lunatics.
Part of the problem is that there are far too many things that can trigger the give the dealer your wallet light that have nothing to do with emissions or safety. Some even come on at timed intervals.
I would have at least tried to read the codes first to make the decision, but given the way auto makers jealously guard that information, it's not always possible.
You can also blame bad design for that. Note how the trivial failure makes darned sure you go get it serviced but the important one gives only momentary notice then signals all's well.
They're on to that one though. Newer software will "sanity check" the sensor as well, so if it keeps reading the same value constantly, it will be deemed failed and the system shuts down until you replace the sensor AND reset the fault. That last bit can be challenging.
More likely, there is no safety related function to the sensor at all and it could be safely bypassed for a week or so during a busy season but for the manufacturer wanting to defeat market forces that might bring profits down.
I'm not so sure the market is working quite right. What is happening is that the valuable new innovations are being actively shunned in favor of older less capable equipment that doesn't include dirty tricks. The market only works if that makes the dirty tricks go away. No sign of that yet.
That's a load of crap from a greedy dealer. The EPA requires that the engine only runs for a limited time if the DEF tank runs dry, but nothing in the regs requires a special reset. They COULD make it reset automatically when you refill the tank and the EPA would be perfectly happy with that.
Where did I suggest doing away with credit? It would necessitate banks being a lot more careful to document extended credit, but that's it.
The things I said are already true but being studiously ignored. All we need to make it so is to fairly enforce the existing laws.
It's not completely without precedent. A few county sheriffs pretty much ended foreclosures in their counties simply by insisting that the banks show evidence of the loan in default. None of them could.
Actually, what we really need is a general recognition that "Identity Theft" is not actually a thing. It's nothing more than a way for a careless bank to pass the losses on to an innocent 3rd party. If a bank is careless enough to hand scads of cash to someone fraudulently claiming to be me, the crime is bank fraud and it has nothing to do with me. That also means that they need more than "because we said so" to validate that I owe them anything at all.
Should they continue to attempt collection after I have denied the debt and they have nothing better than "our records show" to counter my denial it is fraud and harassment. If the bank reports the debt to a credit agency representing it to be mine, they are guilty of libel. If the credit agency in any way passes that information on (including by lowering my credit rating), they are also guilty of libel.
Finally, if they "sell" that debt, the bank has defrauded the collection agency and at the same time joined it in guilt for any harassment that may be inflicted on me.
No conspiracy theories here, just economic realities. A bunch of executives independently arriving at the same decision based on the same reality.
Ask 100 people if they want $5 or a poke in the eye. Is it a 'conspiracy' when all 100 pick $5?
Perhaps you were expecting the free market fairy to wave her wand and fix it?
They DID, in fact, develop synthetic analogs of any number of chemicals found in herbs that have useful medical effects. Sometimes they got it right, sometimes not, but always much more expensive than using the herb itself.
As for the rest, you must be projecting your own insecurities.
Not to mention that it informs the citizens who the labels have repeatedly told that they are charging these fees and getting tough on infringement for the benefit of the artists.
Slashdot Mirror
Definitely not. The ABS is alongside and can influence the applied braking force, but even with power off, the brakes still brake.
The motivation is to make sure the farmer can't hire a 3rd party to put in inexpensive 3rd party parts instead of paying the dealer 'deerly'.
The rest is a side effect.
I generally suggest that people just copy their email down so there will be a backup left on the server for when lookout eats itself or their PC dies.
What makes you think either will happen. This is the post 9-11 world! They will call in every agency they can think of including the forest service and then blow the briefcase up in a big spectacle.
Once they find out it was harmless they will seek to prosecute the owner for whatever they can get to stick for the crime of making them look like raving lunatics.
There are other ways to notice compression and cooling issues.
Part of the problem is that there are far too many things that can trigger the give the dealer your wallet light that have nothing to do with emissions or safety. Some even come on at timed intervals.
I would have at least tried to read the codes first to make the decision, but given the way auto makers jealously guard that information, it's not always possible.
Why would you assume there is no distance in the other brane?
You can also blame bad design for that. Note how the trivial failure makes darned sure you go get it serviced but the important one gives only momentary notice then signals all's well.
Given that he went another 120K miles, I'd say he was right to ignore it.
"Advancing their cause" is not the same thing as "working for"
YES. IT. IS.
They're on to that one though. Newer software will "sanity check" the sensor as well, so if it keeps reading the same value constantly, it will be deemed failed and the system shuts down until you replace the sensor AND reset the fault. That last bit can be challenging.
The usual litany of excuses for bad behavior.
More likely, there is no safety related function to the sensor at all and it could be safely bypassed for a week or so during a busy season but for the manufacturer wanting to defeat market forces that might bring profits down.
I'm not so sure the market is working quite right. What is happening is that the valuable new innovations are being actively shunned in favor of older less capable equipment that doesn't include dirty tricks. The market only works if that makes the dirty tricks go away. No sign of that yet.
That's a load of crap from a greedy dealer. The EPA requires that the engine only runs for a limited time if the DEF tank runs dry, but nothing in the regs requires a special reset. They COULD make it reset automatically when you refill the tank and the EPA would be perfectly happy with that.
He is more likely to get money from the ducks I think.
A management team capable of eating a salad without stabbing themselves in the eye?
Where did I suggest doing away with credit? It would necessitate banks being a lot more careful to document extended credit, but that's it.
The things I said are already true but being studiously ignored. All we need to make it so is to fairly enforce the existing laws.
It's not completely without precedent. A few county sheriffs pretty much ended foreclosures in their counties simply by insisting that the banks show evidence of the loan in default. None of them could.
Looks like someone got butthurt.
But my app doesn't require a specific version of glibc. I just updated my glibc (only) a week or two ago.
If you include re-compiling, it can use a number of other libc implementations as well.
Actually, what we really need is a general recognition that "Identity Theft" is not actually a thing. It's nothing more than a way for a careless bank to pass the losses on to an innocent 3rd party. If a bank is careless enough to hand scads of cash to someone fraudulently claiming to be me, the crime is bank fraud and it has nothing to do with me. That also means that they need more than "because we said so" to validate that I owe them anything at all.
Should they continue to attempt collection after I have denied the debt and they have nothing better than "our records show" to counter my denial it is fraud and harassment. If the bank reports the debt to a credit agency representing it to be mine, they are guilty of libel. If the credit agency in any way passes that information on (including by lowering my credit rating), they are also guilty of libel.
Finally, if they "sell" that debt, the bank has defrauded the collection agency and at the same time joined it in guilt for any harassment that may be inflicted on me.
And you call ME a true believer?
If only we could make that work for humans.
No conspiracy theories here, just economic realities. A bunch of executives independently arriving at the same decision based on the same reality.
Ask 100 people if they want $5 or a poke in the eye. Is it a 'conspiracy' when all 100 pick $5?
Perhaps you were expecting the free market fairy to wave her wand and fix it?
They DID, in fact, develop synthetic analogs of any number of chemicals found in herbs that have useful medical effects. Sometimes they got it right, sometimes not, but always much more expensive than using the herb itself.
As for the rest, you must be projecting your own insecurities.
You keep contradicting yourself. There's no need to explain the obvious, you've made it quite obvious that you don't have a real argument.
The recipient pays tax on the bonus (if it is cash), but it may be that the corporation gets to tyreat the bonus differently on it's taxes.
Not to mention that it informs the citizens who the labels have repeatedly told that they are charging these fees and getting tough on infringement for the benefit of the artists.