Well, not according to [Lance] over at [Sparks and Code], who thought that building a lock picking robot would be an interesting challenge. He started out with a frame to hold a padlock and a servo motor to apply torque. A load cell measures the amount of force applied. This helps to keep the lock under a constant amount of tension as each pin is picked in succession. Although slow, this method seemed to work when moving the pick manually.
The difficult part was automating the pick movement. [Lance] built a clever system driven by two motors that would keep the pick perfectly straight while moving it horizontally and vertically. This was hard enough to get working correctly, but after adding a few additional clamps to remove wobble in the leadscrew, the robot was able to start picking. A second load cell inside the pick arm would detect the amount of force on each pin and work its way across the lock, pin by pin.
I don't have an EOS-3, but I do have an EOS-1V and our cameras should operate the same with respect to your concerns. The AEL will lock the exposure indication (shutter speed/aperture) in the viewfinder along with an asterisk symbol (*). This works in all exposure modes (evaluative, partial, spot, etc.). This indication stays even if you do not maintain partial pressure on the shutter release until timing out or will remain as long as you maintain pressure on the shutter release. If your camera does not work this way you need to send it to Canon for repair.
Whether or not this lock button works does not really matter. It is simply a mechanical interlock to keep you from accidentally moving the ring from the minimum aperture position of f/16 (or f/22, f/32 depending in the lens). As long as the aperture ring is at f/16, all exposure functions that require the aperture ring at minimum position should function. It does not need to actually be "locked".
2. This may be related to #1 above : I still don't understand how the f stop lock works. In neither 90 rotation does it pop up when moved to f 16. I suspect it may be partially locked all the time. I going to continue searching the F5 pdf doc. but if anyone can offer some help, in the mean time, about this situation I would appreciate it.
Master is protected by trademarks. Everyone buys Master locks because their name has been around since eternity. Most locks will never suffer a picking attempt, so just putting a padlock on something is "sufficient" for most people... to never notice that their lock is shit.
I remember back in grade school they did not have a lock cutter. The administration would just whack the combination locks with a hammer and they'd pop right open. I remember one of the non-Master locks popping completely apart and spilling its guts. It doesn't surprise me that it works for other types of locks as well. Locks are, after all, good at keeping honest people honest.
Yeah except he's not hitting it "hard" like you're thinking. "If a hammer isn't an option, a screwdriver handle works just as well." -- it's not like he's using a sledgehammer here. This isn't an attack on the structural integrity of the lock itself, it's more unlocking it like a bump key, and you can re-lock it without leaving evidence you messed with it.
This idiom is contradictory on it's face but it illustrates a truth about people and the human condition, nobody is perfect. You can obtain a large amount of compliance by placing even token limits on behavior. It's why we paint lines on roads, put locks on doors, label doors "Entry Only" (when by law they must function as an exit) and put DNS filters on company networks to keep NSFW surfing down. We encourage generally honest people to stay on the straight and narrow by offering even token amounts of effort to step over into "dishonest" behavior. None of my examples are any more than tokens and all are easily circumvented with little effort and serve to encourage imperfect people to do the right things because most of us actually have a conscience that we listen to and it screams loudly when it take effort to do wrong.
True, but with this method, or lock picking, I can gain access to whatever it is that is locked up, remove what I want, and then replace the lock with no visible evidence of entrance. The noise is minimal, the technique and tools pretty trivial, so that at any opportunity, someone who wanted to could gain entrance and leave without leaving obvious clues. If you had a job box, tool shed, or building locked up with one of these, they could easily gain entrance, and remove something, possibly leaving the owner
Reporting contains the elements that correspond specifically for the site generation phase. Certain Maven plugins can generate reports defined and configured under the reporting element, for example: generating Javadoc reports. Much like the build element's ability to configure plugins, reporting commands the same ability. The glaring difference is that rather than fine-grained control of plug-in goals within the executions block, reporting configures goals within reportSet elements. And the subtler difference is that a plugin configuration under the reporting element works as build plugin configuration, although the opposite is not true (a build plugin configuration does not affect a reporting plugin).
aa06259810