It does not take much driving to heat-up the engine enough to remove water. If the trip is more than say, 10 miles or 10 minutes, whichever comes first, the engine has been heated up enough.
The restored cars we have get their oil changed every couple of years. They get driven very little. Even when we do change it that oil is probably still perfectly usable, we just change it because we don't know the upper limit on the longevity of the oil after it's been used.
The reason for the timetable is that most people are not very good at looking at their odometers, but they are capable of noting a future date in a calendar and taking action on that date. It's also why a lot of newer cars with computers in them will tell you when they need their oil changed instead of relying on a schedule. Wife's '15 Renegade has had exactly one oil change and at less than 13,000 miles on it probably won't alert for another oil change until close to 15,000 miles. Given the pain in the ass it is to remove the skidplate to get to the filter and drain I'm glad I'm not having to put it up on the lift every four to six months to change a fluid.
On the other daily-drivers I change the oil and filter every 7500 miles and I use a partial synthetic motor oil. We're at 172,000 miles on one car and no problems with the engine.
I wasn't bragging, I was discussing the ability to project power. Arguably the ability to project power anywhere in the world is part of the very definition of being a world power, and the degree to which that capability exists is very much something quantifiable even if it's difficult to measure.
Consider the 1982 Falkland Islands War as a case for the decline of the United Kingdom. Not only did the British have a fairly large number of naval losses in the conflict relative to the scale and scope of original Argentine invasion, but that Argentina even felt that it was a viable objective shows how far British influence across the globe had declined. This was no case like Algeria where the French had to contend with a hostile local population that chose to break-away, or of a colony that existed through subjugation of large local indigenous population like something that would have been seen in British interests in Asia, this was an invasion by a hostile foreign force of a British territory populated by Crown subjects.
I very much doubt that any American territories would even be invaded or attacked with conventional military forces, let alone held for any length of time and incurring significant loss in the retaking. Nations that want territory currently held by the US know that retaliation would be swift and fierce, and depending on the nature of the original attack, might be disproportionate. The US has a history dating back to the World War 2 Doolittle Raid on the Japanese home islands and Tokyo in-particular that an opponent's home territory is not off-limits if even a remote territory of ours is attacked. That kind of projection of power is part of what makes the United States powerful, and even when our civilian government is in some state of disarray makes us a poor choice as a target from another nation.
Well the fridge might well be quieter, or at least the pitch of the sounds made is lower so it doesn't seem as attention-grabbing. I could see that as an advantage. Literally the only advantage.
A lot of electronics design for automotive applications takes the old, "design it to run irrespective of temperature and embed it in a thick layer of epoxy" approach, or at least used to, for this exact reason. If moisture cannot get to the components because they're sealed-in then moisture cannot have an impact upon them.
Yeah it's far more complicated than that. The refrigeration cycle is quite involved, especially if it's efficient.
Closed-loop tubing, contains compressor, condenser coil, expansion valve, evaporator coil. Sometimes the cycle changes-state between gaseous and liquid, while in others the state of the refrigerant remains gaseous.
As compressor works, refrigerant is sucked-in and compressed. This generates heat. The hot refrigerant is piped into the condenser coil, where while still under-pressure it's cooled, usually with a fan forcing air across the coil. The still-under-pressure refrigerant is now piped to the expansion valve where the pressure drops, right as it dumps into the evaporator coil. When matter expands it cools, so the expansion process as pressure drops chills the coil itself, and another fan blows air across the evaporator, taking the air in the vicinity and cooling it as that air supplies heat to warm-up the coil, and thus the refrigerant. The now lukewarm or tepid refrigerant, under low pressure, is sucked back into the compressor to repeat the cycle.
The refrigeration cycle cools-off the evaporator coil so much that it condenses water out of the air. This requires a means to get the condensed water off of the coil and out of the area. Sometimes it's as simple as designing the coil to sit at a particular angle such that it drains into a pan and then into a drip-tube, other times it may be necessary to have a sump pump to get the water out of the building.
There's generally not a lot of need to make a system this complicated for consumer equipment cooling. Datacenters and other electronics facilities that have commercial or industrial cooling end up using giant room refrigerators and throw-in humidity controls along with the cooling loop, and the actual equipment to be cooled usually uses simple forced air, albeit to a noisy and ridiculous scale at times. This is so that the cooling of the equipment doesn't drop in temp to the point that it causes condensation on the equipment.
Fancy consumer-grade cooling that uses a liquid configuration is best set up to cool the equipment down to just above ambient temps. If liquid is cycled through a loop then the goal should be to bring the temp down at the end of the radiator far enough to be slightly warmer than ambient, but not below.
When I was designing my shop air compressor system I had problems with water condensating out of the air, and being emitted at the impact gun when using it. Since I also wanted to be able to paint this obviously wouldn't do. I ended up putting an automotive air conditioning condenser coil between the pump-head and the tank, and I put an automatic purge-valve on the tank, such that the hot air out of the compressor pump comes down to just above ambient, the air in the tubing expands and condenses-out the water, and the water is purged.
If I were designing a liquid cooling setup for a computer I'd probably use an automotive transmission cooler with a large, slow fan blowing across it, with the coolant configured in a closed-loop with probably a small pump cycling it through the heatsink on the processor, then out to the transmission cooler acting as a radiator, then back through the pump, repeat. The large, slow fan should help move air over the surface of the transmission cooler quietly, while the fairly quiet little pump keeps everything moving. If needed have the post-radiator coolant deposit into a sump that is then the point from which the pump draws.
Refrigerators for food can ice-up and otherwise have problems with condensation. Any refrigerator sufficiently advanced to have features to avoid this will cost far more than the equipment needed to deal with waste heat specifically for computer applications.
Additionally, most inexpensive consumer-grade refrigerators are not really oriented toward dealing with constant heat. Most food cools and remains cool once it's in-place, and when hot food is put into a consumer-grade refrigerator it takes some time to really come down to the internal ambient temp. Expensive consumer-grade refrigerators may be equipped to better cool hot food quickly, but they probably are not geared toward continuous heat.
If the original purpose of this was to get a dorm or cubicle fridge and build a computer into it, I would not recommend doing that. The difference in air temperature between the inside of the fridge and the ambient is not great enough relative to the waste heat produced by the computer to justify the build.
Consider the Republican perspective- if you were a Republican prior to the Tea Party era then even with your party co-opted you might be hesitant to leave the party, and if you and a bunch of other pre-tea-party Republicans leave to form a new party then there'll be two conservative parties that will diminish in-power much more than half, essentially ceding control of the government to the Democratic Party for as long as it takes for one of those two conservative parties to finally fold.
The problem with any "big tent" party is there are always forces within that party that want different things than other forces. When the issue at-hand is generally in-agreement then those disparate groups might be able to work together for the specific issue, but once that single issue is dealt-with then they can't form consensus on other issues.
The Democratic Party has similar issues at times, to the point that Will Rogers quipped, "I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat."
If we want to fix this kind of partisanship then we need to either acknowledge that political parties have a place in the system and use a voting method that rewards seats in legislative bodies based on the population's vote for that party, and lets voting for party-members decide who fills those seats, or else we need to revise the number of seats in our legislatures to create significantly smaller districts with significantly more representatives, so that gerrymandering is much less effective.
The United States has the largest GDP in the world, even if the EU is considered one 743,100,000 population country.
The United States is also the only nation on the planet capable of engaging in large-scale military action anywhere on the planet with basically no notice and requiring no significant time to configure expeditionary forces.
It's certainly true that other nations may be experiencing more growth than the US, that some of these nations might at some point actually have greater absolute GDP, or even that the US might be in a bit of a decline compared to where it has been in the past, but your assertion, "...thinking they are still a world power while they get thrown into the kiddie pool," is off-base.
Heh. Only songs of hers that I could identify are All I Wanna Do as a very stereotypical '90s song that was good enough I guess, and a cover of Sweet Child of Mine that I didn't care for mostly on-principle at the time she released it.
Her singing in All I Wanna Do was certainly adequate for a quick pop-alternative-rock tune. No idea how she'd fare in other stuff, haven't followed her career.
We haven't seen the contract. We do not know what the verbiage surrounding product quality, if any, is present in the document. We don't know anything about unit count, quality range, warranty, or anything else.
It's possible that all of this is properly enumerated in the contract, but it's also possible that the licensor's terms were poorly spelled-out and that the licensee is free to do exactly what they're doing.
It's possible to tighten-up the supply-chain though, so that one doesn't over-order subassemblies to the point that it's profitable to make authentic-clones of products, and it's usually good practice to employ your own quality assurance staff even if you've outsourced production where that staff gets to be your representative on the ground to attempt to mitigate this kind of practice.
Mind you I do think it's stupid to send-out the manufacturing to a place where the intellectual property is not respected, such that there may not be much recourse if local people choose to abuse the relationship, but I'm not the one making the business decisions either.
Eh, she was good in Rolling in the Deep but I did not like her weird high-pitch attempts in Someone Like You. The female larynx does not develop the same way as the male larynx does in puberty, so women generally cannot use the falsetto the same way men can. When she attempts to reach up out of her normal vocal range I do not find it terribly pleasant. Granted, the male falsetto voice isn't universally pleasant either, but for some reason her range-strain was grating to my ears.
Given the subject of Someone Like You is a woman in emotional pain because she never moved-on from a relationship and the other person has, it perhaps is contextually appropriate for some of the notes in the song to feel tortured, but that doesn't mean that every beat of the song is universally enjoyable.
I see a lot of comments like this but I don't think that people are really all that different from each other, and that it's only small things that lead to the outcomes we see.
Some kind of bigotry exists in everyone. Everyone. Most people do not act overtly on their biases except when those biases are tolerated.
The thought exercise on The Ring of Gyges explores the nature of what people would do if there were no consequences for their actions. Lately we've had numerous examples of the behavior that people at the top of the social order engage-in when consequences for their actions don't seem to exist or to come to mind; people restrain themselves becasuse they fear the consequences for actions they want to take.
In a nutshell, restraint is usually based on a reaction to the judgement of others, and thus behavior is molded based on the judgement of others. Little things in the nature of that judgement can have far reaching implications on a person's behavior. This does not mean that we should excuse someone's bad behavior or choices that lead to their downfall, but in most cases we probably shouldn't celebrate it either, as what happened to them could have just as easily happened to us if a few conditions were only a little different.
Funny, I kind of liked the movies starring Daniel Craig. The nature of the villainy felt reasonably plausible, both from the perspective of the goals of conspiracy among the villains and in the personal failings that individual villains had that left them open to vulnerability and thus defeat. It also felt more realistic, seeing Bond having to operate both in high-society circles and in the nitty-gritty. The Daniel Craig Bond movie I probably cared for least was Skyfall, but mostly because the technological exploitation used to establish the conditions that demonstrated the villain's power and led to the need to retreat to the low-tech stand was too implausible to let me easily suspend disbelief. Still better than Moonkraker though.
There'd be a natural cap. The talent-pool is pretty large and a lot of people are underemployed, there's no practical way to afford to buy-out all of them.
If you license-out the brand name itself then it's very likely that problems won't be discovered until after product has shipped and harmed the brand. After all, the company that has paid for the right to use the SHARP brand has that contact saying they're allowed to do so; the burden to demonstrate that there's an issue falls on the company that licensed-out that brand.
If the owner of the brand wanted to protect the brand they should have retained direct involvement in how the brand is used. That could have been some joint-venture setup where they included their own QEs or SQEs in the manufacturing process to ensure that the sourced-components were up to specifications and that the finished TVs were good, and even their own PEs in the design stages to ensure that the designs were up to par. Instead they are limited to after-the-fact attempts at damage control, and if enough crappy SHARP TVs enter the market then perhaps it'll prove terminal to the whole SHARP brand, not simply the licensed-out TV division.
Then they don't have a lot of room to complain about their deal-with-the-devil unless the contract specified the nature of the quality of the final products in ways that can be objectively measured and quantified.
We've seen how bad it is when you give up control, look at that latest Fantastic Four movie. It makes the unreleased Roger Corman licensing-placeholder look watchable.
No person in the company should be able to do that without peer review. Backups should work and be tested. Clearly he's not the one to blame !
I really could see him being fired from the job. If I were a mechanic and I accidentally broke some important active piece of machinery on my first day I would not find it unreasonable to be fired.
Now, that out of the way, there's a whole host of other people that built the conditions that allowed this to happen that should also be fired. That CTO that suggested the Legal department should be involved is among them, and HR should take exception for how he threatened a new-hire for his own mistake.
Maybe it's time to consider that proto-companies that generate no profitability shouldn't have to be established in some of the most expensive cities in the world.
Maybe it's time to consider that mid-sized companies that are in pretty strong competition in order to remain profitable don't need to be located in some of the most expensive cities in the world.
Maybe it's time to consider that large companies that are continually looking for ways to reduce costs don't need to retain the vast majority of their operations in some of the most expensive cities in the world.
There seems to be a point where a city has gotten so expensive that it is not possible for workers in the service jobs needed to afford to live there, or to even live within reasonable commuter distances. In theory this should lead to a natural cap on the cost of living or a natural floor to wages simply because cities need workers in these jobs, but as has been pointed out in this thread that doesn't mean that landlords won't look for ways to increase their profits, or that the numbers of people that need these unskilled jobs can readily find work closer to where they can easily afford to live.
If the service workers decide to unionize, fine. Good for them.
Slashdot Mirror
On the worn, high-mileage vehicles there's blow-by of the piston rings, so I don't like to push it.
Not if you're in an area that has harsher climate like we are. It's hot and dusty and qualifies as severe duty.
It does not take much driving to heat-up the engine enough to remove water. If the trip is more than say, 10 miles or 10 minutes, whichever comes first, the engine has been heated up enough.
The restored cars we have get their oil changed every couple of years. They get driven very little. Even when we do change it that oil is probably still perfectly usable, we just change it because we don't know the upper limit on the longevity of the oil after it's been used.
The reason for the timetable is that most people are not very good at looking at their odometers, but they are capable of noting a future date in a calendar and taking action on that date. It's also why a lot of newer cars with computers in them will tell you when they need their oil changed instead of relying on a schedule. Wife's '15 Renegade has had exactly one oil change and at less than 13,000 miles on it probably won't alert for another oil change until close to 15,000 miles. Given the pain in the ass it is to remove the skidplate to get to the filter and drain I'm glad I'm not having to put it up on the lift every four to six months to change a fluid.
On the other daily-drivers I change the oil and filter every 7500 miles and I use a partial synthetic motor oil. We're at 172,000 miles on one car and no problems with the engine.
I wasn't bragging, I was discussing the ability to project power. Arguably the ability to project power anywhere in the world is part of the very definition of being a world power, and the degree to which that capability exists is very much something quantifiable even if it's difficult to measure.
Consider the 1982 Falkland Islands War as a case for the decline of the United Kingdom. Not only did the British have a fairly large number of naval losses in the conflict relative to the scale and scope of original Argentine invasion, but that Argentina even felt that it was a viable objective shows how far British influence across the globe had declined. This was no case like Algeria where the French had to contend with a hostile local population that chose to break-away, or of a colony that existed through subjugation of large local indigenous population like something that would have been seen in British interests in Asia, this was an invasion by a hostile foreign force of a British territory populated by Crown subjects.
I very much doubt that any American territories would even be invaded or attacked with conventional military forces, let alone held for any length of time and incurring significant loss in the retaking. Nations that want territory currently held by the US know that retaliation would be swift and fierce, and depending on the nature of the original attack, might be disproportionate. The US has a history dating back to the World War 2 Doolittle Raid on the Japanese home islands and Tokyo in-particular that an opponent's home territory is not off-limits if even a remote territory of ours is attacked. That kind of projection of power is part of what makes the United States powerful, and even when our civilian government is in some state of disarray makes us a poor choice as a target from another nation.
Well the fridge might well be quieter, or at least the pitch of the sounds made is lower so it doesn't seem as attention-grabbing. I could see that as an advantage. Literally the only advantage.
A lot of electronics design for automotive applications takes the old, "design it to run irrespective of temperature and embed it in a thick layer of epoxy" approach, or at least used to, for this exact reason. If moisture cannot get to the components because they're sealed-in then moisture cannot have an impact upon them.
Yeah it's far more complicated than that. The refrigeration cycle is quite involved, especially if it's efficient.
Closed-loop tubing, contains compressor, condenser coil, expansion valve, evaporator coil. Sometimes the cycle changes-state between gaseous and liquid, while in others the state of the refrigerant remains gaseous.
As compressor works, refrigerant is sucked-in and compressed. This generates heat. The hot refrigerant is piped into the condenser coil, where while still under-pressure it's cooled, usually with a fan forcing air across the coil. The still-under-pressure refrigerant is now piped to the expansion valve where the pressure drops, right as it dumps into the evaporator coil. When matter expands it cools, so the expansion process as pressure drops chills the coil itself, and another fan blows air across the evaporator, taking the air in the vicinity and cooling it as that air supplies heat to warm-up the coil, and thus the refrigerant. The now lukewarm or tepid refrigerant, under low pressure, is sucked back into the compressor to repeat the cycle.
The refrigeration cycle cools-off the evaporator coil so much that it condenses water out of the air. This requires a means to get the condensed water off of the coil and out of the area. Sometimes it's as simple as designing the coil to sit at a particular angle such that it drains into a pan and then into a drip-tube, other times it may be necessary to have a sump pump to get the water out of the building.
There's generally not a lot of need to make a system this complicated for consumer equipment cooling. Datacenters and other electronics facilities that have commercial or industrial cooling end up using giant room refrigerators and throw-in humidity controls along with the cooling loop, and the actual equipment to be cooled usually uses simple forced air, albeit to a noisy and ridiculous scale at times. This is so that the cooling of the equipment doesn't drop in temp to the point that it causes condensation on the equipment.
Fancy consumer-grade cooling that uses a liquid configuration is best set up to cool the equipment down to just above ambient temps. If liquid is cycled through a loop then the goal should be to bring the temp down at the end of the radiator far enough to be slightly warmer than ambient, but not below.
When I was designing my shop air compressor system I had problems with water condensating out of the air, and being emitted at the impact gun when using it. Since I also wanted to be able to paint this obviously wouldn't do. I ended up putting an automotive air conditioning condenser coil between the pump-head and the tank, and I put an automatic purge-valve on the tank, such that the hot air out of the compressor pump comes down to just above ambient, the air in the tubing expands and condenses-out the water, and the water is purged.
If I were designing a liquid cooling setup for a computer I'd probably use an automotive transmission cooler with a large, slow fan blowing across it, with the coolant configured in a closed-loop with probably a small pump cycling it through the heatsink on the processor, then out to the transmission cooler acting as a radiator, then back through the pump, repeat. The large, slow fan should help move air over the surface of the transmission cooler quietly, while the fairly quiet little pump keeps everything moving. If needed have the post-radiator coolant deposit into a sump that is then the point from which the pump draws.
Refrigerators for food can ice-up and otherwise have problems with condensation. Any refrigerator sufficiently advanced to have features to avoid this will cost far more than the equipment needed to deal with waste heat specifically for computer applications.
Additionally, most inexpensive consumer-grade refrigerators are not really oriented toward dealing with constant heat. Most food cools and remains cool once it's in-place, and when hot food is put into a consumer-grade refrigerator it takes some time to really come down to the internal ambient temp. Expensive consumer-grade refrigerators may be equipped to better cool hot food quickly, but they probably are not geared toward continuous heat.
If the original purpose of this was to get a dorm or cubicle fridge and build a computer into it, I would not recommend doing that. The difference in air temperature between the inside of the fridge and the ambient is not great enough relative to the waste heat produced by the computer to justify the build.
Consider the Republican perspective- if you were a Republican prior to the Tea Party era then even with your party co-opted you might be hesitant to leave the party, and if you and a bunch of other pre-tea-party Republicans leave to form a new party then there'll be two conservative parties that will diminish in-power much more than half, essentially ceding control of the government to the Democratic Party for as long as it takes for one of those two conservative parties to finally fold.
The problem with any "big tent" party is there are always forces within that party that want different things than other forces. When the issue at-hand is generally in-agreement then those disparate groups might be able to work together for the specific issue, but once that single issue is dealt-with then they can't form consensus on other issues.
The Democratic Party has similar issues at times, to the point that Will Rogers quipped, "I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat."
If we want to fix this kind of partisanship then we need to either acknowledge that political parties have a place in the system and use a voting method that rewards seats in legislative bodies based on the population's vote for that party, and lets voting for party-members decide who fills those seats, or else we need to revise the number of seats in our legislatures to create significantly smaller districts with significantly more representatives, so that gerrymandering is much less effective.
The United States has the largest GDP in the world, even if the EU is considered one 743,100,000 population country.
The United States is also the only nation on the planet capable of engaging in large-scale military action anywhere on the planet with basically no notice and requiring no significant time to configure expeditionary forces.
It's certainly true that other nations may be experiencing more growth than the US, that some of these nations might at some point actually have greater absolute GDP, or even that the US might be in a bit of a decline compared to where it has been in the past, but your assertion, "...thinking they are still a world power while they get thrown into the kiddie pool," is off-base.
The old joke was that if your political views fit on a bumpersticker then you needed better views.
The new joke simply replaces, "on a bumpersticker," with, "in a tweet," or, "in 140 characters or less."
Heh. Only songs of hers that I could identify are All I Wanna Do as a very stereotypical '90s song that was good enough I guess, and a cover of Sweet Child of Mine that I didn't care for mostly on-principle at the time she released it.
Her singing in All I Wanna Do was certainly adequate for a quick pop-alternative-rock tune. No idea how she'd fare in other stuff, haven't followed her career.
Perhaps it does, perhaps it doesn't.
We haven't seen the contract. We do not know what the verbiage surrounding product quality, if any, is present in the document. We don't know anything about unit count, quality range, warranty, or anything else.
It's possible that all of this is properly enumerated in the contract, but it's also possible that the licensor's terms were poorly spelled-out and that the licensee is free to do exactly what they're doing.
It's possible to tighten-up the supply-chain though, so that one doesn't over-order subassemblies to the point that it's profitable to make authentic-clones of products, and it's usually good practice to employ your own quality assurance staff even if you've outsourced production where that staff gets to be your representative on the ground to attempt to mitigate this kind of practice.
Mind you I do think it's stupid to send-out the manufacturing to a place where the intellectual property is not respected, such that there may not be much recourse if local people choose to abuse the relationship, but I'm not the one making the business decisions either.
Eh, she was good in Rolling in the Deep but I did not like her weird high-pitch attempts in Someone Like You. The female larynx does not develop the same way as the male larynx does in puberty, so women generally cannot use the falsetto the same way men can. When she attempts to reach up out of her normal vocal range I do not find it terribly pleasant. Granted, the male falsetto voice isn't universally pleasant either, but for some reason her range-strain was grating to my ears.
Given the subject of Someone Like You is a woman in emotional pain because she never moved-on from a relationship and the other person has, it perhaps is contextually appropriate for some of the notes in the song to feel tortured, but that doesn't mean that every beat of the song is universally enjoyable.
I bet the leakers are selling these drugs on the dark web to make Trump look bad.
You appear to be operating under the assumption that he needs help in that regard.
I see a lot of comments like this but I don't think that people are really all that different from each other, and that it's only small things that lead to the outcomes we see.
Some kind of bigotry exists in everyone. Everyone. Most people do not act overtly on their biases except when those biases are tolerated.
The thought exercise on The Ring of Gyges explores the nature of what people would do if there were no consequences for their actions. Lately we've had numerous examples of the behavior that people at the top of the social order engage-in when consequences for their actions don't seem to exist or to come to mind; people restrain themselves becasuse they fear the consequences for actions they want to take.
In a nutshell, restraint is usually based on a reaction to the judgement of others, and thus behavior is molded based on the judgement of others. Little things in the nature of that judgement can have far reaching implications on a person's behavior. This does not mean that we should excuse someone's bad behavior or choices that lead to their downfall, but in most cases we probably shouldn't celebrate it either, as what happened to them could have just as easily happened to us if a few conditions were only a little different.
Funny, I kind of liked the movies starring Daniel Craig. The nature of the villainy felt reasonably plausible, both from the perspective of the goals of conspiracy among the villains and in the personal failings that individual villains had that left them open to vulnerability and thus defeat. It also felt more realistic, seeing Bond having to operate both in high-society circles and in the nitty-gritty. The Daniel Craig Bond movie I probably cared for least was Skyfall, but mostly because the technological exploitation used to establish the conditions that demonstrated the villain's power and led to the need to retreat to the low-tech stand was too implausible to let me easily suspend disbelief. Still better than Moonkraker though.
There'd be a natural cap. The talent-pool is pretty large and a lot of people are underemployed, there's no practical way to afford to buy-out all of them.
Sure it follows.
If you license-out the brand name itself then it's very likely that problems won't be discovered until after product has shipped and harmed the brand. After all, the company that has paid for the right to use the SHARP brand has that contact saying they're allowed to do so; the burden to demonstrate that there's an issue falls on the company that licensed-out that brand.
If the owner of the brand wanted to protect the brand they should have retained direct involvement in how the brand is used. That could have been some joint-venture setup where they included their own QEs or SQEs in the manufacturing process to ensure that the sourced-components were up to specifications and that the finished TVs were good, and even their own PEs in the design stages to ensure that the designs were up to par. Instead they are limited to after-the-fact attempts at damage control, and if enough crappy SHARP TVs enter the market then perhaps it'll prove terminal to the whole SHARP brand, not simply the licensed-out TV division.
Then they don't have a lot of room to complain about their deal-with-the-devil unless the contract specified the nature of the quality of the final products in ways that can be objectively measured and quantified.
We've seen how bad it is when you give up control, look at that latest Fantastic Four movie. It makes the unreleased Roger Corman licensing-placeholder look watchable.
Maybe if they didn't want their brand to take a substantial hit, they shouldn't have licensed it out.
No person in the company should be able to do that without peer review. Backups should work and be tested. Clearly he's not the one to blame !
I really could see him being fired from the job. If I were a mechanic and I accidentally broke some important active piece of machinery on my first day I would not find it unreasonable to be fired.
Now, that out of the way, there's a whole host of other people that built the conditions that allowed this to happen that should also be fired. That CTO that suggested the Legal department should be involved is among them, and HR should take exception for how he threatened a new-hire for his own mistake.
Maybe it's time to consider that proto-companies that generate no profitability shouldn't have to be established in some of the most expensive cities in the world.
Maybe it's time to consider that mid-sized companies that are in pretty strong competition in order to remain profitable don't need to be located in some of the most expensive cities in the world.
Maybe it's time to consider that large companies that are continually looking for ways to reduce costs don't need to retain the vast majority of their operations in some of the most expensive cities in the world.
There seems to be a point where a city has gotten so expensive that it is not possible for workers in the service jobs needed to afford to live there, or to even live within reasonable commuter distances. In theory this should lead to a natural cap on the cost of living or a natural floor to wages simply because cities need workers in these jobs, but as has been pointed out in this thread that doesn't mean that landlords won't look for ways to increase their profits, or that the numbers of people that need these unskilled jobs can readily find work closer to where they can easily afford to live.
If the service workers decide to unionize, fine. Good for them.