|
It's either an OEM driver thing, shipped as part of the OS installation, or a boot setting thing.
If you can't find it in the boot menu, you can still switch to a DELL OEM image instead.
Avoids Lenovo specific annoyances and still picks up the embedded OEM key.
I figured that out when my dad bought a decently specced Lenovo for just $200.. and the thing either crashed during startup or couldn't use Wifi at all, because the Wifi OEM driver was faulty (and also impossible to remove, update or replace). Switched to the DELL OEM image and everything worked fine.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks but my
Lenovo Commercial Vantage -> Device
has no such settings, in fact no settings at all.
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried one of those USB dongles that simulates a mouse being jiggled every 15 seconds or so? Place I worked used them to save repeated 5-minute logons while the remote system got it's arse in gear.
|
|
|
|
|
Is it a corp-controlled laptop image, or a device you own?
Laptop OEMs always seem to author so much garbage "value-add" configuration software, that interferes or conflicts with basic OS functionality. Who knows what it could be doing. The first thing I do with any new laptop is reformat and reinstall OS, and drivers. If I can.
|
|
|
|
|
Must be a feature installed by default by Lenovo. Dell has the exact same thing that you can only control through their "Dell Optimizer" application. They call it "Walk Away Lock" under "Presence Detection". It would automatically lock my computer if I wasn't directly in front of it for more than 60 seconds.
A quick search led me to this:
Quote: The human presence sensor is enabled by default. To disable the function:
Open the Vantage app, and then click Device ➙ Smart Assist to turn on or turn off the User Presence Sensing switch. Customize the Zero Touch Login and Zero Touch Lock settings according to your preference.
Restart the computer. When the logo screen is displayed, press F1 to enter the UEFI BIOS menu. Select Security ➙ Intelligent Security to customize detailed settings..
|
|
|
|
|
I beg of you to repair as I'm unable ? (9)
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming “Wow! What a Ride!" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
I beg of you
to repair MEND
as I'm unable I CAN'T
MENDICANT
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
modified 25-Oct-22 4:04am.
|
|
|
|
|
Good man 
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming “Wow! What a Ride!" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
When You Forget the Break Condition in Your Python Program
9gag alert : https://9gag.com/gag/aGER3dn[^]
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clearly a containerized program!
|
|
|
|
|
I find cppcheck as plugin for Codeblocks IDE to very useful. Especially for memory leaks. Any opinions on its general use?
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
Cppcheck is awesome. We have it in our CI (continuous integration), so it runs automagically on check-in.
Not only that... but I happen to work with the guy who originally wrote it! (They are a team now)
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
Cool. I have saved lots of time debugging code when I use it.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
We used it for a while.
I don't remember the reason why we stop using it.
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
#Worldle #276 1/6 (100%)
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🎉
https://worldle.teuteuf.fr
easy one
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've heard of linters and used them.
Probably from a bit of background in C/C++.
Very helpful online linters for html, json, javascript.
Sometimes those online JS linters can bail you out of trouble when you can't see a missing/extra comma or bracket.
|
|
|
|
|
I have ESLint enabled in VS at my work...
"Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid." ― Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't know about them, thanks for the heads up.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll check this out.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
I am surprised that anyone has not heard of a linter ...
I grew up with compilers who did those kinds of things. Compilers not allowing just any kind of dirt, because 'you asked for it, you got it'. When C came on the scene, my generation quickly made shell macros to always run lint before running the compiler, to get something resembling what they were used to with the compilers of the old days.
In my last job, we tightened some of the Lint rules, redefining a few warnings as errors, and required the build job to be aborted if lint reported an error. The logging system reported the number of (non-fatal) lint warnings for each build to a statistics module, to monitor the development of code quality.
We gradually changed to Python, and although there is a sort of Python-lint, it never was mandated. The programmers were happy: They were no longer bugged by these nasty remarks of bad code quality.
Sadly, I am not surprised that far too many of my workmates will call such development "progress".
|
|
|
|
|
Static analysis tools do not provide any value in modern programming. When they were first invented compilers had almost zero effective error reporting so using a second tool with pattern matching to find those before compilation seemed like a good idea.
The authors or companies pushing them often claim benefits that do not exist.
Bugs in software which are actually significant, where significant means costing time (and thus money) to fix come from logic errors and system errors which static analysis tools cannot identify by their very nature.
Adherence to static analyzers can actually end up creating code that is not as easy to maintain and even end up introducing bugs. This happens when developers just try anything to get it to pass. The argument proponents make about that problem is that developers should be more diligent. But of course the same argument applies to why one might claim that a static analyzer is a good idea in the first place. Why are those very same diligent developers being nit-picked in the first place?
|
|
|
|
|
From what I can see, all we're using it for is ensuring code formatting is correct. So now I have to go back and remove extra lines, or empty spaces at the end of line, etc. Seems like a real time waster to me
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
