I find YaleGuy3`s rather insipid post amusing ( About defeating a Yale detector). I mentioned its "sleep pattern"
It is there in the manual, freely available on their website for ANYONE to read. I got the information from there after he declared the detectors do not go to sleep.
In conjunction with anothers idea of using a frequency jammer. Nothing new there then, has been going on for years in various guises.
I wonder what makes it so special now in the middle of an interesting debate where it is constantly proven the main character has no real idea of how the equipment he fits works. It is one thing "sticking" it to a wall another understanding how and why it works.
His continual assumptions on percentages of what happens is another example. His "accusation" of "Peaps" being a scaremonger for the security industry is also rather amusing. He is definitely not a member, and not a thief either from what I know about him. So another deduction incorrectly made.
Why would Yale "sue" me for repeating what they freely make available on their website? ( You want to check out You Tube, then again maybe not, you might have a heart attack). If anything you should be called to account for your rather embarrassing rants and raves, making out your their representative. I have in the past mentioned you to their sales and technical departments and had a very limited response, perhaps they are not too bothered. They certainly are difficult to get into a discussion with, even when giving them cut and pasted evidence. I would say as far as avoidance was the better wording on this one.
So where is it incorrect to reproduce a freely available item from the website that is open to all? You cannot freely get this sort of information from graded systems. And before you bleat on about programming it is perfectly acceptable to assist in that, not defaulting. Which again Yale freely give out on the aforementioned.
As for your last statistic over the Christmas period I was aware of 6 break ins where the victims were at home, luckily no one was hurt. As usual a "targeting" gang were to blame. Yet to be caught unfortunately.
These people have now had graded systems fitted with detection in the correct areas, and for multiple options of part setting during the day. Another thing lacking in your choice of fitments.
FYI locking away is an insurance requirement with systems with monitoring with an issued URN. An object of some consternation with some clients as they do not want a safe , but to be insured they have to. And I mean a safe, made by Dudley or other major long established safe makers. As the limits on other makes are inadequate.
Anyway, good luck on what you feel should be done. When the items you have pointed out have been removed from a public website then I shall of course have no means of republishing them as they will not be available unless I were to be registered with company. Then If I were to publish I would of course be libel for a strong word or two.
But definitely not from someone like you.