Trying to keep another thread about 2009 997's getting
DFI, yet providing a forum to comment and explain differing views on NDA's/copyright, etc. I've put it under forum feedback because I believe this is feedback in relation to how the forum is managed wrt understanding views and opinions of the various members. Mine is just one view.
The initial issue: a member enters a post with a link to possible copyrighted information. A moderator, etc asks to have the link removed, or removes it, or the originator of the 'copyrighted' material asks to remove it. In any case, the link is removed.
Ok, the above sets up differing dynamics in the varying individuals: moderators, owner, members, etc. Each one of these is an individual with differing values, drivers, consequences, etc wrt the retraction of said link.
You can all add your views, flame me, ignore me, whatever turns your crank. Here's mine: I understand reasonably well the issue of copyright, its history, cultural attitudes towards it, how it effects differing areas, etc. Yes, it is a legal definition with legal consequences. There is also a cultural aspect toward copyright that crosses national, age, sex and countless other boundaries.
For me (and this will be different for everybody), copyright is varying shades of grey, with some distinct black and white. Can I make exact replica's of another manufacturers car and sell it for my own? No. What about Andy Warhol's various paintings? Should I get the printing press out and make some up for retail? Nope. Where the line blurs for me is so called intellectual property, and I lump the written word, and to some degree, music, movies, etc. in this category.
Now, if you are what I call a 'sheep' (based on a Leiden University study on process safety in hazardous industries), you will take the law as a strict definition and never be tempted to reproduce anything for fear of not abiding. A so called 'wolf' will look at the same law and go 'yeah, that law applies to me too, but nothing is black and white and I'm going to do some interpretation'. I'm probably a little closer to a 'wolf' than a 'sheep' in some respects, and when it comes to copyright in this instance.
Do companies misuse copyright (and trademarks, patents, etc) to further their cause - yep. Do consumers - yep. In this instance, Porsche had put out some document, release, whatever that contained certain information. Was it a trade secret from what I can ascertain? Not that I know of but then I never did get to see the document in question, so I must say I had to do some assuming of which there is risk involved.
Did Porsche know what was in that release and the consequences to Porsche of that information getting into the public domain? Darn tootin' they did - either that or there
PR and mgmt are a bunch of slackers - which I highly doubt.
So Porsche, in this case, has a leg up on the public as to the value of that information. And it very well appears that this information was all over the net by the time requests were made to pull the 'original'. So what purpose was the 'retraction' request serving? Not sure. One assumption, which is reality in more and more instances, is that said retraction can cause more wanted
PR. Does Porsche like that? Sure. Can it threaten others, even remotely, that they should comply to the retraction request? Yep. Will they comply? More than likely. Now, my consequences for not complying are surely different than the website owners. Does that cause me to have a different reaction, based on either lack of sympathy or empathy? Yep.
Therefore, differing attitudes based on differing views and level of risks being accepted. In my mind, this is not right or wrong but society pushing back and adopting. American history is full of instances where laws were broken, misdeeds done, etc that eventually molded the future with positive consequences. If some members are asked to do something that they may agree with or empathize with, but would like to rally against the bigger picture while doing it, so what? Let them. Are they hearing or understanding the position stated by the moderator? They may well be, but they just may not really sympathize towards it in the same manner - and chastising or repeating the same logic will probably not go anywhere except to further raise resistance.
So reply, argue, flame what I have said (I would ask that some individuals restrain themselves from the tiring view of 'do you think you're going to change history through the net? What, are you stupid?' - maybe, maybe not).
Thx for reading this to the end if it makes any sense. This is not aimed at any one individual, btw, it is more aimed at the general communication flow on the site - which is still an excellent site!
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
DFI
|
 |
Direct Fuel Injection (DFI), is a new technology that Porsche states can cut fuel consumption by up to 15 percent, while increasing power by up to 13 percent. DFI cuts emissions by warming up the catalytic converter more quickly, and ensures a sharper throttle response. Better for your right foot - and the planet, then.
DFI allows much more precise measurement of fuel supply and injection at pressures up to 120 bar; it has numerous combustion modes, with different cycles for cold-starting, low-speed driving and performance driving.
As the name suggests, DFI injects fuel directly into the individual combustion chambers, instead of the intake manifold. The injector valves have an electromagnetic mechanism that controls each injection with astonishing precision, while a high-pressure pump provides the necessary pressure—up to 1,740 psi—to accompany the rapid fire of the fuel injection.
Precise geometry of the injector’s position and its spray pattern is a key factor in helping to improve power, torque and emissions of the engines. The specific placement of the fuel as it enters each chamber creates a swirl that improves the air/fuel mixture, and therefore the overall combustion process.
At engine speeds up to 3500 rpm, a double-injection process is used. In this mode, the required fuel volume is delivered in two successive injections per working stroke. The resulting benefits include faster catalyst warm-up and increased torque in the upper load range.
By forming the air/fuel mix directly in the combustion chamber, DFI contributes to engine cooling. As a result, it is possible to increase the compression ratio and with it the power and efficiency of the engine.
The direct injection process is continuously adjusted. The engine management system reads changes to throttle inputs and performance requirements and, as you drive, the air/fuel mix is monitored and adapted as required. Oxygen sensor circuits within the exhaust system provide accurate emissions control. |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |