I refer to your stance
which is totally unethical.
Omg, again with that?
Ok i will explain again like in post 23 & 59...
It's not what I was going to do, it was a "thinker about this" a reflection for everyone, you misunderstood me.
Read better please.
Some other want to blame me by this misunderstanding?
you are literally saying if I can't get caught, then it's not a problem...
Thinking like this IS a problem
anyway... I'm out again. I think you have all the suggestions to improve your gig.
1 Like
Somehow I lost the thread: If it is about building a vandal proof doorlock for teachers: These guys earn money. If they want a vandal proof lock, they should buy it. Or pay you a decent amount to get it done. If they don't, then they do not suffer enough --> let them suffer a little more. Just my 2¢
1 Like
For this i said think about this, THINK ABOUT THIS, so, use your brain and think if someone can make and want to make.
Is needed to explain word by word?
The problem is that my wife also is member of the parents asociation and she is rear me to that i make and install the system...
Dunno if amazon is less spensive than me...
It's probably appropriate to discontinue trying to read motive into a clearly rhetorical question by OP and consider ways to vandal proof the project.
For example, one could solder the chip into the PCB to prevent attempts to remove and clone it. Presumably there is a keypad available so that should be mounted on the outside of the locker door while the rest of the circuitry is on the inside to prevent bypassing the security. Maybe the battery should go outside to prevent getting locked out from dead battery. My concern would be the poor teacher having to enter a 32 byte passcode for entry.
Etc, etc, etc
1 Like
not so clear to me...
That's a perfectly legitimate thought question and in no way implies that anyone is actually going to violate any license agreements. If you honestly think about answering the question the first thing that comes to mind is "Who would bother to check?"
The whole thrust of this thread was solved many decades ago with licensing agreements between the producer and the customer who receives the chip/product. The OP never mention consideration of needing to update/correct errors in the software.
the way I read it - in the context of GPL V3 and associated obligations - was that protecting the code against copy was his solution. The "think about this" to me read as "I've a free pass there"...
anyway. let's move on. it's all irrelevant to the use case.
2 Likes
OP is interested in preventing devious kids from reverse engineering and being able to unlock teachers' lockers not keeping the intellectual property police at bay.
that was not clear until later in the thread.
I'm out. not following this thread anymore. all has been said
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d64tr0JGJ3s
In this video you can see how to make a copy,... But if you want to protect it without going to the fuse bits, it is enough to use a pin or two from the ISP by setting it to LOW. A password is entered, and in the sketch it is completed: if the pin is HIGH, the entire program can be blocked. The sketch is copied but unable to run.
What has the parents asociation to do with teachers lockers?
You didn't ask me but in the USA it's PTA, Parents Teachers Association. Parents and teachers collaborate to do things like raise funds to reimburse teachers for materials they have purchased to assist in teaching that the school doesn't furnish, share ideas about how to better educate the students, etc. and in this case apparently help the teachers figure out how to protect their lockers from curious students.
Ok ... raises the question why teacher lockers are not in a secured area in the first place.
Maybe you underestimate young people.