Answer:
Hello Monk7294!
Answer:
Employee education
Explanation:
The most important countermeasure for social engineering is employee education. All the employees should be trained to keep confidential data safe. As a part of security education, organizations have to provide timely orientation about their security policy to new employees. The security policy should address the consequences of the breaches.
<em>- I Hope this helps Have an awesome day!</em>
<em>~ Chloe marcus <3</em>
Explanation:
She is passionate about architecture, typography, and black & white film ... Since moving to Texas, I've heard a lot of people say, "If you don't like ... Oc, 3.74, 56, 80 ... Not only does the weather have to be clear to pour the concrete, but it ... system that goes within the slab) is complete, any additional rain will
Answer:
Explanation:
It wouldn't work because the wind energy she would be collecting would actually come from the car engine.
The relative wind velocity observed from a moving vehicle is the sum of the actual wind velocity and the velovity of the vehicle.
u' = u + v
While running a car will generate a rather high wind velocity, and increase the power generated by a wind turbine, the turbine would only be able to convert part of the wind energy into electricity while adding a lot of drag. In the end, it would generate less energy that what the drag casuses the car to waste to move the turbine.
Regenerative braking uses an electric generator connected to the wheel axle to recover part of the kinetic energy eliminated when one brakes the vehicle. Normal brakes dissipate this energy as heat, a regenerative brake uses it to recharge a batttery. Note that is is a fraction of the energy that is recovered, not all of it.
A "regenerative accelerator" makes no sense. Braking is taking kinetic energy out of the vehicle, while accelerating is adding kinetic energy to it. Cars accelerate using the power from their engines.
Answer:
t = 25.10 sec
Explanation:
we know that Avrami equation
here Y is percentage of completion of reaction = 50%
t is duration of reaction = 146 sec
so,
taking natural log on both side
ln(0.5) = -k(306.6)
for 86 % completion
t = 25.10 sec
Answer:
Artefacts can influence our actions in several ways. They can be instruments, enabling and facilitating actions, where their presence affects the number and quality of the options for action available to us. They can also influence our actions in a morally more salient way, where their presence changes the likelihood that we will actually perform certain actions. Both kinds of influences are closely related, yet accounts of how they work have been developed largely independently, within different conceptual frameworks and for different purposes. In this paper I account for both kinds of influences within a single framework. Specifically, I develop a descriptive account of how the presence of artefacts affects what we actually do, which is based on a framework commonly used for normative investigations into how the presence of artefacts affects what we can do. This account describes the influence of artefacts on what we actually do in terms of the way facts about those artefacts alter our reasons for action. In developing this account, I will build on Dancy’s (2000a) account of practical reasoning. I will compare my account with two alternatives, those of Latour and Verbeek, and show how my account suggests a specification of their respective key concepts of prescription and invitation. Furthermore, I argue that my account helps us in analysing why the presence of artefacts sometimes fails to influence our actions, contrary to designer expectations or intentions.
When it comes to affecting human actions, it seems artefacts can play two roles. In their first role they can enable or facilitate human actions. Here, the presence of artefacts changes the number and quality of the options for action available to us.Footnote1 For example, their presence makes it possible for us to do things that we would not otherwise be able to do, and thereby adopt new goals, or helps us to do things we would otherwise be able to do, but in more time, with greater effort, etc
Explanation:
Technological artifacts are in general characterized narrowly as material objects made by (human) agents as means to achieve practical ends. ... Unintended by-products of making (e.g. sawdust) or of experiments (e.g. false positives in medical diagnostic tests) are not artifacts for Hilpinen.
