[HN Gopher] List of Special Elevator Modes
___________________________________________________________________
List of Special Elevator Modes
Author : altrus
Score : 167 points
Date : 2021-07-08 19:52 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (elevation.fandom.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (elevation.fandom.com)
| hawk_ wrote:
| my personal favorite is the Sabbath mode
| https://elevation.fandom.com/wiki/Sabbath_service_(SHO)
|
| not to pick on a specific belief system, but it's quite
| interesting the lengths people go to follow the letter but not
| the spirit of things.
| jackbeck wrote:
| Previous discussion here:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27010617
| canadianfella wrote:
| Can we all agree that religion is pretty silly?
| chimeracoder wrote:
| > not to pick on a specific belief system, but it's quite
| interesting the lengths people go to follow the letter but not
| the spirit of things.
|
| That's not the way observant Jewish people look at it at all.
| You're assuming that these workarounds are not "following the
| spirit", but according to them, the workarounds are as much a
| part of the spirit of the law as the law itself.
| tamaharbor wrote:
| Tell that to your nearest Eruv.
| AndrewDucker wrote:
| The letter was, they believe, the word of God. If God hadn't
| meant the loophole to be there then he would have used
| different words. The loophole is _divine_.
| LudwigNagasena wrote:
| If the loophole seems to go directly against intended
| meaning, can you say it's there?
| jacobr1 wrote:
| The distinction is the belief that there is no intended
| meaning beyond the literal meaning.
| krapp wrote:
| >If God hadn't meant the loophole to be there then he would
| have used different words. The loophole is divine.
|
| One could just as well state that if God had meant the
| loophole to be there, he would have mentioned it.
| Kalium wrote:
| When you believe in an omniscient and omnipotent lawgiver,
| that line of argument is a little weak.
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| If you assume omniscience and omnipotence as a starting
| point, then you can justify _anything_ that exists using
| the same reason, otherwise it wouldn 't exist, right? I
| don't mean to get into a theological or ontological
| argument, though. It just seems like you can use the
| foundation to justify anything you want.
| stickfigure wrote:
| "If God didn't intend for us to eat animals, then why did
| he make them out of meat?"
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| "If God didn't intend for us to eat people, then why did
| he make them out of meat?"
| krapp wrote:
| God doesn't explicitly forbid cannibalism anywhere in the
| Bible. We just have to find a way to define humans as
| ruminants with cloven hooves and it'll all be kosher.
| leephillips wrote:
| Where did you get the idea that the Hebrew God is
| supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent? I am told that
| biblical Hebrew does not even have a word for omnipotent.
| skissane wrote:
| Orthodox Jews accept Rambam (Maimonides)'s 13 principles
| of the faith. Rambam taught that all his 13 principles
| can be derived from the Torah.
|
| The 10th principle explicitly says that God is
| omniscient. The 1st principle "Belief in the existence of
| the Creator, who is perfect in every manner of existence
| and is the Primary Cause of all that exists" doesn't
| explicitly mention omnipotence but rather obviously
| entails it. (If God is not omnipotent, then God is not
| "perfect in every manner of existence" since God would
| not be perfect in power.)
|
| https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/332555/jew
| ish...
|
| Whether or not the ancient Hebrews believed in divine
| omniscience and omnipotence is something that can be
| historically debated. But contemporary Orthodox Jews do.
|
| (I'm not Jewish but I hope I've stated the Orthodox
| Jewish viewpoint accurately.)
| leephillips wrote:
| Thanks for pointing this out. I encountered the claim
| recently that the concept of divine omnipotence was
| invented by Catholic theologians. maybe in the early
| middle ages, and does not quite exist in Judaism. But
| you're pretty convincing.
| krapp wrote:
| I mean... If God's so omnipotent why did he need to rest
| on the seventh day to begin with?
| disruptthelaw wrote:
| I took my gap year in israel with a religious Jewish friends.
| We were slight stoners back then and on sabbath in order for
| him to get high I'd have to light a bong in a cupboard and fill
| the cupboard with smoke and then swap places with him. This was
| multiple times per sabbath every sabbath. I also had to
| constantly open the fridge for him because of the automatic
| light. I found these rituals ridiculous (20 years later I still
| do) and we fought over it and decided to part ways for the rest
| of the gap year.
| deregulateMed wrote:
| Any idea if he is still a zealot or if he is woke yet?
| ars wrote:
| He should not have done that. In general a Jew is not
| permitted to ask a non-Jew to do things that are forbidden to
| him.
|
| Some exceptions are things necessary for normal life, that
| would be impossible to do in advance. A classic example is
| lighting a fire for heating (back when that was done with a
| pile of wood), and minor medical needs. (Major medical needs
| the Jew would violate the Shabbath and do himself.)
|
| Getting high is not a necessity, and the fridge switch could
| have been taped before the Shabbath.
| jtchang wrote:
| Goes well with the Eruv around NYC:
| https://www.npr.org/2019/05/13/721551785/a-fishing-line-enci...
|
| It is hilarious the lengths people go to.
| michaelhoffman wrote:
| The prohibition is on doing work generally, with a specific
| prohibition on kindling a fire, which was quite a lot of work
| millennia ago.
|
| Does using a device that allows you to avoid walking up many
| flights of stairs really violate the spirit of a law
| prohibiting work on the sabbath?
| moduspol wrote:
| And for that matter, where is the line drawn?
|
| The other workaround I had heard for this is to have a non-
| Jew hired specifically to stand in the elevator and push
| buttons on behalf of Jews on the sabbath. But they'd still
| have to speak the floor so the attendant would know what
| button to push, right?
|
| If so, what if an elevator had basic voice recognition?
| Speaking the floor number to a machine is no more work than
| speaking it to an attendant, right?
|
| Maybe this rule interpretation was originally made back when
| elevators generally had attendants and did require some
| expertise to operate (e.g. to stop at the right spots)? And
| then didn't get rolled back when it became essentially
| trivial?
| bellyfullofbac wrote:
| If speaking isn't allowed, a hack* would be for the
| elevator to start counting, and tell the passenger to nod
| or lift their head up after their floor number is
| mentioned. Or even just walk to the activation corner.
|
| * I asked Yahweh, he said this is legal.
| hawk_ wrote:
| if the idea is to not work then pressing a button isn't going
| to change anything. if the elevator is being taken to do some
| work, again pressing the button has nothing to do with it.
| ars wrote:
| "Work" is a bad translation. A better translation would be
| "creative activity". Fire is a problem not because it's work
| to light, but because you are creating heat from wood.
| 908B64B197 wrote:
| You'll enjoy this then (when Richard Feynman encountered
| something similar):
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/ev3gy/excerpt_from...
| jackbeck wrote:
| There are sects (like the ultra orthodox) who don't use Sabbath
| mode specifically for this reason. They say that the added
| weight causes the elevator's motor to work harder thereby
| desecrating the Sabbath.
| dmurray wrote:
| Are they allowed to go down?
|
| Also, depending on the counterweight and the current load of
| the elevator, adding an extra person to it might tax the
| motor less even when ascending.
| ars wrote:
| Generating electricity is equally forbidden.
|
| The prohibition is not work, but rather creation. In this
| case creating electrical energy.
| chadash wrote:
| In Orthodox Judaism, the letter of the law typically _is_ the
| spirit of the law. Not a perfect analogy, but think of the
| talmud as similar to the tax code. There are things that are
| black, things that are white and things that are gray. If the
| tax code said there 's a 5% sales tax on tangerines,
| clementines, navel oranges, lemons, and grapefruit, I'm
| probably not gonna volunteer to pay taxes on my Sumo Citruses,
| because it's not explicitly in there. Perhaps doing so would be
| in the spirit of the law, but that's just not the way people
| think when it comes to taxes. Same thing in Judaism... if it's
| technically legal, you can do it (this stems from the notion
| that the Jewish legal rules are of divine origin, and so if
| something was excluded, then its absence is intentional)[1].
|
| Of course, much like the tax code, there are gray areas where
| different accountants (rabbis) may interpret the rules
| differently. One place where the analogy diverges is that in
| Judaism, there are lots of areas where the earlier generations
| of rabbis acknowledge something to be technically allowed
| according to the divine rules, but they forbid it anyway,
| either because they felt there was some societal benefit to
| doing so, or because they felt that adding an additional
| prohibition would prevent people from accidentally breaking the
| divine rule [1].
|
| [1] Of course, the analogy breaks down, because it's more
| complicated than this. There are plenty of areas where people
| are customarily stricter, even if something is ok by the letter
| of the law. This applies to Sabbath Mode on elevators, which
| many Orthodox Jews won't use, but won't necessarily say that
| it's prohibited.
|
| [2] An example of this is the prohibition of eating milk and
| meat in the same dish. Technically, the divine rule is no
| _cooking_ milk and meat together, but the rabbis added an extra
| rule of no _eating_ them together to make sure that people
| wouldn 't come to cook them together.
| asciimov wrote:
| So my Jewish friends could technically eat a cheese burger,
| as long as the cheese was placed on the burger after cooking?
|
| Would they have to wait till the burger cools down so that it
| doesn't melt the cheese? (Here I am concerned about carryover
| heating/cooking being considered cooking by law.)
|
| I am endlessly fascinated by religious laws and their
| implications/consequences.
| dsr_ wrote:
| You would have to find someone who counted the validity of
| the original law ("Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its
| mother's milk" in Exodus https://www.mechon-
| mamre.org/p/pt/pt0223.htm) but did not count any later
| interpretation or fence around it.
|
| Please talk to your participants well before you start this
| experiment; very few people are going to have an equivocal
| attitude towards it.
| chadash wrote:
| _> So my Jewish friends could technically eat a cheese
| burger, as long as the cheese was placed on the burger
| after cooking?_
|
| No they can't, but this would be a violation of a
| rabbinical law (the rabbis forbade _eating_ them together
| as a safeguard), which is less serious than a biblical law
| violation.
|
| _> Would they have to wait till the burger cools down so
| that it doesn 't melt the cheese? (Here I am concerned
| about carryover heating/cooking being considered cooking by
| law.)_
|
| The real question you are asking is what counts as cooking.
| This has _lots_ of ramifications in Jewish law,
| particularly because cooking in general is forbidden on the
| sabbath. From here, you can go down the rabbit hole of
| related questions. What temperature counts as cooking? If
| something has a low melting point, is it treated
| differently or is there an absolute temperature? Can you
| keep things warm on the Sabbath if they are already cooked?
| Can you rewarm them? I can go on and on, but the gist is
| that it gets complicated and this is the reason why there
| are many people who spend a lifetime learning talmud and
| never master it.
|
| But to answer your question specifically, waiting for the
| burger to cool down is irrelevant in this case since it's
| rabbinically prohibited to eat them together anyway. The
| only real question is at what temperature it goes from a
| rabbinical to a biblical prohibition.
| asciimov wrote:
| Thanks for your answer. It sounds like most things
| involving religion, complicated.
| jacobr1 wrote:
| I can highly recommend "Legal Systems Very Different from
| Ours" by David Friedman
|
| http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Legal%20Systems/LegalSystemsC
| o...
|
| It includes a few chapters on religion-based legal systems
| and is interesting throughout.
| LudwigNagasena wrote:
| First, when people feel that the tax code doesn't represent
| the spirit of the law, they change the wording, likely they
| will amend it and put the same tax on Sumo Citruses as on
| other citruses. So the tax code and the Talmud are quite
| different animals.
|
| Second, I am pretty sure the Talmud is not so precise to the
| point of specifically mentioning pressing pressing buttons on
| an elevator. So the analogy kind of doesn't work there again.
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| Imagine if the US Code suddenly became fixed and holy. Now
| imagine you are thousands of years in the future. Congress
| is long gone and if you're lucky you might have some notes
| and stories about how the laws were enforced in the past.
|
| Naturally, the world has changed a lot since the text of
| the law became immutable. But who is to say how new things
| fit into the old framework? What about old contradictions
| that were never addressed? What about laws on the books
| that were never enforced in practice, do those still count?
| And so on.
|
| In our hypothetical scenario there is no Supreme Court, but
| there would probably be dozens of 'pretenders to the
| throne' who believe they have the right to interpret the
| law correctly. So you as an individual can choose which
| school of thought you want to subscribe to. Letter of the
| law? Spirit of the Law?
|
| And in a funny way, when we ask ourselves "what did the
| Founding Fathers want?" we are doing the same thing as
| theologians when they wonder what God wanted.
| chadash wrote:
| To extend this analogy further, in Judaism, we ascribe
| more value to the opinions of rabbis "closer to the
| source". So we would look at the tax code from 1000 years
| ago and try to interpret that. But we might also say,
| "John Marshall was a great justice and one of his
| opinions dealt with something similar, how can we apply
| that to our situation here?"
| derefr wrote:
| > this stems from the notion that the Jewish legal rules are
| of divine origin, and so if something was excluded, then its
| absence is intentional
|
| I would like to understand the reasoning behind the belief
| that even legal rules of divine origin would include mention
| of things human culture would have had no concept of, and
| human language no word for, in the time the rule was made --
| such that the rules would be "complete for all future time"
| rather than "those relevant as of the time of covenant."
|
| Wouldn't even a god think it more optimal to hold off on
| telling us rules about e.g. which synthetic meats are kosher,
| until we invent such things?
|
| It seems awfully _suspicious_ to the validity of that
| interpretation, that there are plenty of specific /concrete
| prohibitions given amongst divine rulings, but of those, none
| are about things that were entirely mysterious at the time,
| written down "as spoken" without understanding, only able to
| be made sense of centuries/millennia later.
|
| In fact -- the Hebrew god is an intercessor god, not an
| absent god; don't they already "amend" their own previous
| rules whenever they communicate specific orders / demands /
| requirements to particular people? Does that not, by itself,
| disrupt the interpretation of the initial set of laws given
| being a perfect closed set, never to be updated, applicable
| to all future circumstances? Would a perfect body of divine
| law not already _imply_ those orders / demands /
| requirements, such that there would be no need for further
| communication?
| golemiprague wrote:
| In Jewish monotheism god is beyond time and space, probably
| because the concept of God tries to encompass the infinity
| of the universe in time and space and the lack of
| understanding of those things, us being humans.
|
| Therefore when we ascribe some will to god, specifically
| the will for humans to follow all those rules, we believe
| that this god "exists" in every time and every space, past
| present or future.
|
| That's why also the "spirit" of the rules doesn't matter,
| we don't try to understand god, all we can is to try to
| understand things which are in the realm of science. Spirit
| of the rules is something that might exist in a human moral
| system, not something we believe that came from a
| transcended entity beyond our understanding.
| derefr wrote:
| Oh, I do get that; I'm more asking why a timeless god
| wouldn't tell the Jews 4000 years ago to e.g. not
| construct or partake of social-networking apps (and other
| such things where they'd have no idea what their God was
| on about.) An intercessor god dreamed up _today_ would
| certainly give commandments like that; so why wouldn 't a
| god giving commandments 4000 years ago, but who "exists
| outside of time", do the same?
| el_nahual wrote:
| There are a few sibling comments explain this by saying that,
| since the law is divine, so are the loopholes. That doesn't
| tell the whole story.
|
| A big chunk of judaism has always centered about cultural
| preservation. In a way, the careful crafting of ridiculous
| loopholes is a stronger indicator about _caring that the law
| exists_ --ie, presereving the culture-- than blindly following
| it. And so it 's allowed and celebrated.
|
| ("What happens when a culture that is built on the notion of
| being an opressed people finds itself in a position of
| dominance" is an interesting question and left as an exercise
| to the reader.)
| thrdbndndn wrote:
| With all respect, what you said makes zero sense to me.
|
| I don't see how "caring that the law exists" equals to
| "preserving the culture" (at least not see it in a good way),
| or how it's _not_ "blindly following it".
| dinkleberg wrote:
| Maybe this is common knowledge, but I never knew people used
| fandom for topics like this. I'm amazed that it had 800+ articles
| and over 1000 videos on a wiki dedicated to elevators.
| codetrotter wrote:
| Here's another couple pretty random Fandom wikis that I came
| across just recently. Linking the specific pages I landed on
| them at.
|
| https://allspecies.fandom.com/wiki/Bogdanoff_Twins
|
| A fandom wiki about "all species" and it has just short of 1k
| articles about everything from these two guys to fictional
| species such as Alien.
|
| https://monstercat.fandom.com/wiki/Crab_Rave
|
| This one is specifically about the music label Monstercat. It
| has about 4k pages.
| fansub wrote:
| Fandom was formerly known as Wikia, the commercial platform
| launched by Jimmy Wales. This wiki (along with many others) was
| launched long before the Fandom name.
| fortran77 wrote:
| There are many "elevator spotters" on YouTube. I can watch
| elevator videos for hours.
|
| For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nE9x-S_3sdY
|
| It's a very interesting community:
|
| See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz9ZzIgyDR8
| ethbr0 wrote:
| Seems as good a place as any to OT, but does anyone know of a
| vacuum tube wiki?
|
| I may have acquired some Otis elevator power(?) tubes, but
| have no idea where to go for part schematics or
| identification. I'd love to build them into a project, but am
| not sure where to start.
| thrdbndndn wrote:
| I think the surprising part (to me at least) isn't there are
| communities for elevator lovers, but there is a wiki about it
| _on Fandom_.
| jdmichal wrote:
| I remember seeing an elevator once that lit up both the up
| and down arrows when arriving if it didn't have a set
| destination yet. I called it Schroedinger's elevator --
| neither going up or down until observed to move.
| rossdavidh wrote:
| Were you alive or dead when you noticed this?
| jdmichal wrote:
| I was on vacation. So more alive than typical, but dead
| to those who usually see me around.
| dinkleberg wrote:
| I love this aspect of HN. I never would've known there was a
| community around a shared interest in elevators, yet this
| topic has hit the top of HN and a bunch of members of that
| community have all gathered here.
| swiley wrote:
| Are you aware of the vim fandom?
|
| It seems to be one of the more complete vim wikis and it's
| probably the most annoying wiki for a piece of open source
| software ever. I often go without using whatever information is
| on there just to avoid listening to my fans (heh) spin up.
| trhway wrote:
| "pet mode" reminded about my cat many years ago - we lived on the
| 5th floor of an apartment building, and going outside the cat
| would walk the stairs down, yet coming back the cat would sit
| near elevator on the ground floor until somebody would come to
| use the elevator and everybody knew that "the white cat rides to
| the 5th floor" so they would let him out there.
| ortusdux wrote:
| I had read somewhere that holding the boor close button along
| with your desired floor button will override the que in many
| elevators, taking you directly to that floor. I successfully
| tested the button combo in the elevator in my building. It came
| in handy when a kid pressed all the buttons and then stuck his
| tongue out at me.
| teruakohatu wrote:
| If says this about 'Pet Mode'
|
| > Does not infect other passengers if the animal has an infection
|
| I think this must be a mistranslation. There are very few
| infectious diseases that a human can get from being around a
| house pet. I think they mean allergies.
| dbcurtis wrote:
| Pfft. List is far from complete. I have done 3rd party interfaces
| to several elevator controllers. I am highly encumbered by NDA's,
| so won't say much. But I still wonder what "Korean Lunch 2" mode
| does???
| neolog wrote:
| > so won't say much
|
| can you say something though?
| iratewizard wrote:
| Ah, yes. The mode that fills the elevator with vinegar and
| waits for the passengers to ferment.
| rossdavidh wrote:
| I live in a warm climate and can confirm that sometimes the
| passengers do start fermenting, if it's summer in the middle
| of the day.
| hooplah wrote:
| Wouldn't that most likely be derivative of a peak mode (either
| up or down).
|
| Park at top, open doors, wait for traffic down, return up.
|
| Korea Lunch 1 would park at top for people leaving for lunch, 2
| would park at bottom for people returning?
| jannyfer wrote:
| Ooh I've no idea what that would do, but wanted to share
| something interesting I noticed.
|
| When I visited Korea, I've noticed companies tend to have exact
| 12-1PM lunchtimes, all at the same time. People raise eyebrows
| if you leave at 11:50 and return 12:50.
|
| At 12PM, it's hard to grab an elevator going down, so people
| will press the "up" button to try to catch an empty elevator,
| then ride it to the top then down to the ground. Vice versa for
| 1PM.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| > When I visited Korea, I've noticed companies tend to have
| exact 12-1PM lunchtimes, all at the same time. People raise
| eyebrows if you leave at 11:50 and return 12:50.
|
| It just seems so inefficient to do it that way? In theory, I
| guess the company sorta benefits from having everyone on/off
| at once, but doing it like that basically guarantees traffic
| jams.
| lozaning wrote:
| All the buildings in Samsung's digital city in Suwon have
| their lunches organized by floor. It is verboten to go to
| the cafeteria before the lights on your floor dim,
| indicating it is now your floors turn. The cafeterias,
| while huge, aren't large enough to accomodate everyone
| going at the same time.
| rightbyte wrote:
| I wish 'hold to deselect' was standard. It only works on some
| elevators and it can be quite annoying if some kid presses all
| floors ...
| jackbeck wrote:
| I found that on some elevators a quick double press cancels a
| selection.
| grensley wrote:
| My favorite interview question is "how do elevators work"?
|
| 0. If they immediately blurt out something like "I know how
| elevators work", probably don't hire them.
|
| 1. You can find out what areas they're most interested in. Do
| they jump straight to the physical mechanics? The programming?
| The UI? The abstraction that they're solving a problem?
|
| 2. Eventually, they reach a point where they just have to say "I
| don't know". The rabbit hole really just keeps going with
| elevators. You could know this question is coming and we will
| still easily reach the knowledge boundary.
|
| 3. If they "don't know" you can ask them to guess how a system
| might work. Or give them time to research it and follow up with
| you later.
| dqv wrote:
| Since we're talking about elevators, it would appear anyone can
| call the elevator's emergency phone line. Which is good, but also
| has unintended consequences: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMdXyQ5ra/
| llampx wrote:
| I wondered why, during the pandemic, it wasn't common to let
| elevators "air out" while they were idle. Given what we know
| about COVID-19 and how it spreads with aerosols. From looking at
| this list, it appears that that's not a mode they would have by
| default.
| galago wrote:
| I work in an office building that's less than 5 years old.
| During the pandemic the elevators started returning to the
| ground floor and opening their doors. I wonder if the system is
| configured via the control panel in the elevator or if there's
| some other interface.
| jakemal wrote:
| Sounds like it was in up-peak mode?
| https://elevation.fandom.com/wiki/Up_peak_(MIT)
| matsemann wrote:
| Related, Elevator Saga.
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27487111
|
| A game where you program the logic of elevators to move people
| around efficiently. Surprisingly complicated.
| 1024core wrote:
| I found a "mode" in an elevator in India that I have not seen
| anywhere else: if a destination floor number is highlighted, and
| you press it twice, it gets cancelled. I have used this magic
| power just once, when an obnoxious man got on and insisted on
| having a loud conversation on his phone. Since he wasn't paying
| attention, I double-tapped his floor number and made him skip. I
| happened to get off at the floor before his, so the elevator went
| down to the first floor after dropping me off. Small
| pleasures....
| 63 wrote:
| I believe your story highlights precisely why more elevators
| don't include that functionality.
| svat wrote:
| Donald Knuth's _The Art of Computer Programming_ has, in its
| first volume, a lengthy section on simulating an elevator. It is
| a single regular elevator (nothing "special" going on as in the
| post here), but even so, as he tries to make things precise, you
| realize how much detail is involved, and get some appreciation
| for the task of programming.
|
| It occupies about 15 pages (plus several pages of exercises and
| solutions). Knuth started working on TAOCP when he was a PhD
| student at Caltech:
|
| > _The program developed below simulates the elevator system in
| the Mathematics building of the California Institute of
| Technology. The results of such a simulation will perhaps be of
| use only to people who make reasonably frequent visits to
| Caltech; and even for them, it may be simpler just to try using
| the elevator several times instead of writing a computer
| program._ [...]
|
| > _The algorithm we will now study may not reflect the elevator's
| true principles of operation, but it is believed to be the
| simplest set of rules that explain all the phenomena observed
| during several hours of experimentation by the author during the
| writing of this section._ [...]
|
| > _The elevator system described above is quite complicated by
| comparison with other algorithms we have seen in this book, but
| the choice of a real-life system is more typical of a simulation
| problem than any cooked-up "textbook example" would ever be._
|
| It ends with:
|
| > _It is hoped that some reader will learn as much about
| simulation from the example above as the author learned about
| elevators while the example was being prepared._
|
| And one of the exercises adds:
|
| > _It is perhaps significant to note that although the author had
| used the elevator system for years and thought he knew it well,
| it wasn't until he attempted to write this section that he
| realized there were quite a few facts about the elevator's system
| of choosing directions that he did not know. He went back to
| experiment with the elevator six separate times, each time
| believing he had finally achieved a complete understanding of
| its_ modus operandi. _(Now he is reluctant to ride it for fear
| that some new facet of its operation will appear, contradicting
| the algorithms given.) We often fail to realize how little we
| know about a thing until we attempt to simulate it on a
| computer._
| mmastrac wrote:
| My university had an elevator with a special three-button
| keypress that took you to a dark sub-basement full of asbestos
| warnings and terrifyingly dark that wasn't listed on the display.
| _squared_ wrote:
| You should have explored a bit, might be cake down there
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| One time when working as a pentester, we were doing redteaming
| (read: breaking into target buildings, physically). Well, they
| were doing redteaming; I always wanted to, but never quite got
| the opportunity.
|
| One of the ideas thrown around for achieving the objective was to
| somehow get ahold of an elevator key, stop it, and hide in there
| until the building closed.
|
| I don't know if they actually did that, but it would've been
| hilarious to see them pop out like a scoobie doo villain and jack
| into an ethernet port while the janitor has no idea what's going
| on.
| 542458 wrote:
| There's a legendary defcon talk about elevators where the
| speaker describes doing exactly that on several occasions.
| Searching "Defcon Elevator" on YouTube should pull up the video
| in question.
| mpd wrote:
| I ran into https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUvGfuLlZus (Elevator
| Hacking: From the Pit to the Penthouse) awhile back, and it was
| so interesting to me that I ended up watching the entire 2 hours
| in one sitting.
| banana_giraffe wrote:
| Another such list is on Wikipedia:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator#Special_operating_mod...
|
| Wiki lists a "Riot mode", which is just amazing if it's a thing.
| natch wrote:
| I'll just leave this here... I love this guy, he is so passionate
| about mechanical stuff. A bit on the odd side but a lot of heart.
|
| https://youtube.com/c/WestCoastElevators
| mmazing wrote:
| I recall hearing of a mode one time where elevators would only go
| to the 2nd floor and not the 1st. Something for crime, etc.
|
| Maybe it was from a movie or something ...
|
| Edit : Thanks! Found it -
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator#Riot_mode
| rail wrote:
| Riot mode.
| dkdbejwi383 wrote:
| So only going 0 to 2 and that's it? Not sure I understand the
| use case.
| Akronymus wrote:
| 1st floor, for many people, refers to the ground floor.
|
| Basically, it excludes the ground level/publicly accessible
| floor, like a hotel lobby.
| geephroh wrote:
| Slightly off-topic, but I'd definitely recommend Colson
| Whitehead's _The Intuitionist_[1] for anyone interested in the
| intersection of elevators and speculative mysteries. Never
| thought I'd get the chance to post this to an HN thread...
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Intuitionist
| royjacobs wrote:
| If you're interested in elevators and the hacking thereof I would
| also highly recommend this talk: https://youtu.be/ZUvGfuLlZus
| simlevesque wrote:
| The kind of videos you can watch once a year. Deviant Ollam is
| so interesting.
| phnofive wrote:
| Pet mode is interesting; it allows you to take your pet on an
| express ride to your desired floor at the cost of a slightly
| slower speed.
| Aardwolf wrote:
| Or can be abused, without pet, to go directly to your desired
| floor without being interrupted by those passengers at other
| floors.
| pjerem wrote:
| In Japan, where this pet mode exists, honor and respect of
| social rules are something, and I doubt you would take the
| risk to be seen leaving an elevator in pet mode without a
| pet.
| dbcurtis wrote:
| Some destination-dispatch systems used in high-end residential
| towers will not schedule pet owners and non-pet owners to the
| same cab at the same time. Which makes a lot of sense.
| dmurray wrote:
| I'd expect it to be more of a problem having multiple pet
| owners in the same car.
| dbcurtis wrote:
| Well you have dog-phobic or people with allergies for
| neighbors.
| heikkilevanto wrote:
| Yes, I have a slight allergy for most of my neighbors :-)
| Y_Y wrote:
| > Pros
|
| > Does not infect other passengers if the animal has an
| infection
|
| I'm glad that elevators are concerned about such a scenario.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-08 23:00 UTC)