What is the word for things that work even when they aren't working - e.g escalators?..can stop the equipment work/working/from working?Searching for a word that means… “even better than”Word for eating things that aren't foodIs there a word for when workers raise expectations unsustainably high when they work too hard?Term for the person working with chocolateWord to describe a person who knows the names of things without knowing how they workWhat is a word that describes when a user assumes the system they are using knows what they know?

Are there any privately owned large commercial airports?

How to use an equalizer?

Why did Batman design Robin's suit with only the underwear without pants?

Would Anti-Magic Zone Affect Dragon Breath?

What is this dial on my old film camera for?

Is there an engine that finds the best "practical" move?

'Cheddar goes "good" with burgers?' Can "go" be seen as a verb of the senses?

Applying rules on rules

What can I do to avoid potential charges for bribery?

What is joint estimation?

Is It Possible to Make a Virus That Acts as an Anti-virus?

Does these arithmetic means on Pythagorean triangles converge?

What is the pattern to appear in the box?

Numbering like equations for regular text

How honest to be with US immigration about uncertainty about travel plans?

Is this an error...?

Make Leaflet polyline bold by hover?

How can my hammerspace safely "decompress"?

Prove the inequality is true

Is sleeping on the ground in cold weather better than on an air mattress?

Why is lying to Congress a crime?

Leningrad - Number Theory

What is the meaning of "shop-wise" in "… and talk turned shop-wise"?

Why is CMYK & PNG not possible?



What is the word for things that work even when they aren't working - e.g escalators?


..can stop the equipment work/working/from working?Searching for a word that means… “even better than”Word for eating things that aren't foodIs there a word for when workers raise expectations unsustainably high when they work too hard?Term for the person working with chocolateWord to describe a person who knows the names of things without knowing how they workWhat is a word that describes when a user assumes the system they are using knows what they know?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;









5

















I'm looking for a word (or phrase) to describe mechanisms that are perfectly functional even when they aren't functioning as expected.



Examples of these include:




  • Escalators & Electric Walkways: Even when they aren't powered these systems still function as perfectly adequate stairs or sidewalks


  • Mopeds: Even when out of gas, the owner can still pedal along


  • Electric Toothbrushes: One can still brush their teeth without turning it on

I've considered using engineering and management terms such as redundant mechanisms, enhanced systems or fault-tolerant machines that come close but those terms refer to very specific technical concepts that don't apply to my needs or the the examples.










share|improve this question























  • 4





    This is an excellent question, to which I don’t have an answer. I imagine this sort of thing must be quite difficult to Google, but I’m sure you’ve tried looking around for a word to describe the concept before asking here. In order to show your own research efforts (and prevent potential close votes), you should edit the question and add in a description of what you’ve tried and why that led to no satisfactory result.

    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    8 hours ago











  • @JanusBahsJacquet Thanks for the feedback. I attempted to do so in the last sentence of my request above but will add some more details.

    – Eric Kigathi
    8 hours ago











  • @EricKigathi Janus was recommending that you show some of the search terms or reasons why you've rejected your own suggestions. I think this is a GREAT question. But, I agree with him on helping to prevent close votes from some users.

    – David M
    7 hours ago






  • 3





    From wikipedia : A fault-tolerant design enables a system to continue its intended operation, possibly at a reduced level, rather than failing completely, when some part of the system fails Is that not okay in both a technical and everyday-speech context ?

    – k1eran
    7 hours ago











  • I'm not sure what kind of mopeds you've used, but the one I rode a long time ago would not function as a bicycle. Oh, I could pedal it down the street, maybe, but certainly not across town. Still, I agree that this is an interesting question; my point is minor.

    – J.R.
    26 mins ago

















5

















I'm looking for a word (or phrase) to describe mechanisms that are perfectly functional even when they aren't functioning as expected.



Examples of these include:




  • Escalators & Electric Walkways: Even when they aren't powered these systems still function as perfectly adequate stairs or sidewalks


  • Mopeds: Even when out of gas, the owner can still pedal along


  • Electric Toothbrushes: One can still brush their teeth without turning it on

I've considered using engineering and management terms such as redundant mechanisms, enhanced systems or fault-tolerant machines that come close but those terms refer to very specific technical concepts that don't apply to my needs or the the examples.










share|improve this question























  • 4





    This is an excellent question, to which I don’t have an answer. I imagine this sort of thing must be quite difficult to Google, but I’m sure you’ve tried looking around for a word to describe the concept before asking here. In order to show your own research efforts (and prevent potential close votes), you should edit the question and add in a description of what you’ve tried and why that led to no satisfactory result.

    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    8 hours ago











  • @JanusBahsJacquet Thanks for the feedback. I attempted to do so in the last sentence of my request above but will add some more details.

    – Eric Kigathi
    8 hours ago











  • @EricKigathi Janus was recommending that you show some of the search terms or reasons why you've rejected your own suggestions. I think this is a GREAT question. But, I agree with him on helping to prevent close votes from some users.

    – David M
    7 hours ago






  • 3





    From wikipedia : A fault-tolerant design enables a system to continue its intended operation, possibly at a reduced level, rather than failing completely, when some part of the system fails Is that not okay in both a technical and everyday-speech context ?

    – k1eran
    7 hours ago











  • I'm not sure what kind of mopeds you've used, but the one I rode a long time ago would not function as a bicycle. Oh, I could pedal it down the street, maybe, but certainly not across town. Still, I agree that this is an interesting question; my point is minor.

    – J.R.
    26 mins ago













5












5








5


1






I'm looking for a word (or phrase) to describe mechanisms that are perfectly functional even when they aren't functioning as expected.



Examples of these include:




  • Escalators & Electric Walkways: Even when they aren't powered these systems still function as perfectly adequate stairs or sidewalks


  • Mopeds: Even when out of gas, the owner can still pedal along


  • Electric Toothbrushes: One can still brush their teeth without turning it on

I've considered using engineering and management terms such as redundant mechanisms, enhanced systems or fault-tolerant machines that come close but those terms refer to very specific technical concepts that don't apply to my needs or the the examples.










share|improve this question
















I'm looking for a word (or phrase) to describe mechanisms that are perfectly functional even when they aren't functioning as expected.



Examples of these include:




  • Escalators & Electric Walkways: Even when they aren't powered these systems still function as perfectly adequate stairs or sidewalks


  • Mopeds: Even when out of gas, the owner can still pedal along


  • Electric Toothbrushes: One can still brush their teeth without turning it on

I've considered using engineering and management terms such as redundant mechanisms, enhanced systems or fault-tolerant machines that come close but those terms refer to very specific technical concepts that don't apply to my needs or the the examples.







single-word-requests word-choice terminology






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question



share|improve this question








edited 7 hours ago







Eric Kigathi

















asked 8 hours ago









Eric KigathiEric Kigathi

1505 bronze badges




1505 bronze badges










  • 4





    This is an excellent question, to which I don’t have an answer. I imagine this sort of thing must be quite difficult to Google, but I’m sure you’ve tried looking around for a word to describe the concept before asking here. In order to show your own research efforts (and prevent potential close votes), you should edit the question and add in a description of what you’ve tried and why that led to no satisfactory result.

    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    8 hours ago











  • @JanusBahsJacquet Thanks for the feedback. I attempted to do so in the last sentence of my request above but will add some more details.

    – Eric Kigathi
    8 hours ago











  • @EricKigathi Janus was recommending that you show some of the search terms or reasons why you've rejected your own suggestions. I think this is a GREAT question. But, I agree with him on helping to prevent close votes from some users.

    – David M
    7 hours ago






  • 3





    From wikipedia : A fault-tolerant design enables a system to continue its intended operation, possibly at a reduced level, rather than failing completely, when some part of the system fails Is that not okay in both a technical and everyday-speech context ?

    – k1eran
    7 hours ago











  • I'm not sure what kind of mopeds you've used, but the one I rode a long time ago would not function as a bicycle. Oh, I could pedal it down the street, maybe, but certainly not across town. Still, I agree that this is an interesting question; my point is minor.

    – J.R.
    26 mins ago












  • 4





    This is an excellent question, to which I don’t have an answer. I imagine this sort of thing must be quite difficult to Google, but I’m sure you’ve tried looking around for a word to describe the concept before asking here. In order to show your own research efforts (and prevent potential close votes), you should edit the question and add in a description of what you’ve tried and why that led to no satisfactory result.

    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    8 hours ago











  • @JanusBahsJacquet Thanks for the feedback. I attempted to do so in the last sentence of my request above but will add some more details.

    – Eric Kigathi
    8 hours ago











  • @EricKigathi Janus was recommending that you show some of the search terms or reasons why you've rejected your own suggestions. I think this is a GREAT question. But, I agree with him on helping to prevent close votes from some users.

    – David M
    7 hours ago






  • 3





    From wikipedia : A fault-tolerant design enables a system to continue its intended operation, possibly at a reduced level, rather than failing completely, when some part of the system fails Is that not okay in both a technical and everyday-speech context ?

    – k1eran
    7 hours ago











  • I'm not sure what kind of mopeds you've used, but the one I rode a long time ago would not function as a bicycle. Oh, I could pedal it down the street, maybe, but certainly not across town. Still, I agree that this is an interesting question; my point is minor.

    – J.R.
    26 mins ago







4




4





This is an excellent question, to which I don’t have an answer. I imagine this sort of thing must be quite difficult to Google, but I’m sure you’ve tried looking around for a word to describe the concept before asking here. In order to show your own research efforts (and prevent potential close votes), you should edit the question and add in a description of what you’ve tried and why that led to no satisfactory result.

– Janus Bahs Jacquet
8 hours ago





This is an excellent question, to which I don’t have an answer. I imagine this sort of thing must be quite difficult to Google, but I’m sure you’ve tried looking around for a word to describe the concept before asking here. In order to show your own research efforts (and prevent potential close votes), you should edit the question and add in a description of what you’ve tried and why that led to no satisfactory result.

– Janus Bahs Jacquet
8 hours ago













@JanusBahsJacquet Thanks for the feedback. I attempted to do so in the last sentence of my request above but will add some more details.

– Eric Kigathi
8 hours ago





@JanusBahsJacquet Thanks for the feedback. I attempted to do so in the last sentence of my request above but will add some more details.

– Eric Kigathi
8 hours ago













@EricKigathi Janus was recommending that you show some of the search terms or reasons why you've rejected your own suggestions. I think this is a GREAT question. But, I agree with him on helping to prevent close votes from some users.

– David M
7 hours ago





@EricKigathi Janus was recommending that you show some of the search terms or reasons why you've rejected your own suggestions. I think this is a GREAT question. But, I agree with him on helping to prevent close votes from some users.

– David M
7 hours ago




3




3





From wikipedia : A fault-tolerant design enables a system to continue its intended operation, possibly at a reduced level, rather than failing completely, when some part of the system fails Is that not okay in both a technical and everyday-speech context ?

– k1eran
7 hours ago





From wikipedia : A fault-tolerant design enables a system to continue its intended operation, possibly at a reduced level, rather than failing completely, when some part of the system fails Is that not okay in both a technical and everyday-speech context ?

– k1eran
7 hours ago













I'm not sure what kind of mopeds you've used, but the one I rode a long time ago would not function as a bicycle. Oh, I could pedal it down the street, maybe, but certainly not across town. Still, I agree that this is an interesting question; my point is minor.

– J.R.
26 mins ago





I'm not sure what kind of mopeds you've used, but the one I rode a long time ago would not function as a bicycle. Oh, I could pedal it down the street, maybe, but certainly not across town. Still, I agree that this is an interesting question; my point is minor.

– J.R.
26 mins ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















4


















If it avoids catastrophic failure, it exhibits:




graceful degradation - Graceful degradation is the ability of a computer, machine, electronic system or network to maintain limited functionality even when a large portion of it has been destroyed or rendered inoperative. The purpose of graceful degradation is to prevent catastrophic failure. Ideally, even the simultaneous loss of multiple components does not cause downtime




I do not think you will find one word for these things. They are not "working" as designed... they have failed. They simply have failed in a way that doesn't completely destroy their utility, but that's not to say the couldn't fail that way. The wheels could fall off the moped, the brush on the electric toothbrush could break off.



You're more describing a failure mode than a specific variety of things. So, another answer geared at a description, rather than one word.






share|improve this answer


























  • I think he's looking for something that is understandable without jargon, not so much a single word. I like this answer, though.

    – David M
    6 hours ago











  • Graceful degradation is more for things like each node on the net continuing to function even when other nodes are failing or misbehaving. It does not mean that you can still use your PC as a limited computer if the power is off.

    – puppetsock
    5 hours ago











  • Its used in an aviation context here aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43919/… ... meaning you can fly the plane even when some electronic components fail

    – stevesliva
    5 hours ago











  • I'm not sure the term has made the leap from electronics to humble electricals.

    – Edwin Ashworth
    4 hours ago











  • I'm not sure where I picked it up. I recalled "graceful" used with regards to failure to distinguish from catastrophic failure. I like the terminology because it requires no real definition to understand. But what I found interesting in the aviation link is that failsoft was used, and if the OP really wants something that pithy, there it is. But if someone threw failsoft at me, I wouldn't know what sort of characteristic it was supposed to distinguish.

    – stevesliva
    3 hours ago



















2


















These designs feature inherent utility.



Their design features an intrinsic quality that makes them utile even when they're not fully functional. In fact, you could use the word intrinsic instead of inherent.



These are not standard phrases, but I think are understandable on their faces.



Also consider redundant utility.



==========



Additional answer:



We can also say the design of these devices has a built-in fail-safe.



Fail-Safe




1 : incorporating some feature for automatically counteracting the effect of an anticipated possible source of failure.







share|improve this answer




























  • I agree with this though I prefer useful to utile as I prefer stink to fetor. :)

    – Lambie
    6 hours ago











  • @Lambie Fetor is a perfectly cromulent word.

    – David M
    6 hours ago











  • I think "inherent" is way difficult to define. Which is more inherent, riding a powered moped, or pedaling a dead one? Redundant would be if there was a second escalator right next to the first one.

    – puppetsock
    5 hours ago












  • You should point out that these aren't as used here standard phrases, and that 'functional utility' already has a (different) meaning. I'm sure OP is asking for a standard word or phrase to be suggested, rather than a sensible-looking juxtaposition.

    – Edwin Ashworth
    4 hours ago












  • @puppetsock I didn't say most inherent. Rather the the utility is inherent to the design, i.e. at its core.

    – David M
    1 hour ago



















0


















Alternate Mode Machines - auto to manual?






share|improve this answer









New contributor



tblue is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




























    0


















    These machines are manually operable.



    Assuming one mode as powered by a motor as automatic and a secondary non-powered mode of use as manual such as in the case of escalators or mopeds, all of these items have the same in common. They can be operated manually.






    share|improve this answer



























      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "97"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );














      draft saved

      draft discarded
















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f514454%2fwhat-is-the-word-for-things-that-work-even-when-they-arent-working-e-g-escala%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown


























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      4


















      If it avoids catastrophic failure, it exhibits:




      graceful degradation - Graceful degradation is the ability of a computer, machine, electronic system or network to maintain limited functionality even when a large portion of it has been destroyed or rendered inoperative. The purpose of graceful degradation is to prevent catastrophic failure. Ideally, even the simultaneous loss of multiple components does not cause downtime




      I do not think you will find one word for these things. They are not "working" as designed... they have failed. They simply have failed in a way that doesn't completely destroy their utility, but that's not to say the couldn't fail that way. The wheels could fall off the moped, the brush on the electric toothbrush could break off.



      You're more describing a failure mode than a specific variety of things. So, another answer geared at a description, rather than one word.






      share|improve this answer


























      • I think he's looking for something that is understandable without jargon, not so much a single word. I like this answer, though.

        – David M
        6 hours ago











      • Graceful degradation is more for things like each node on the net continuing to function even when other nodes are failing or misbehaving. It does not mean that you can still use your PC as a limited computer if the power is off.

        – puppetsock
        5 hours ago











      • Its used in an aviation context here aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43919/… ... meaning you can fly the plane even when some electronic components fail

        – stevesliva
        5 hours ago











      • I'm not sure the term has made the leap from electronics to humble electricals.

        – Edwin Ashworth
        4 hours ago











      • I'm not sure where I picked it up. I recalled "graceful" used with regards to failure to distinguish from catastrophic failure. I like the terminology because it requires no real definition to understand. But what I found interesting in the aviation link is that failsoft was used, and if the OP really wants something that pithy, there it is. But if someone threw failsoft at me, I wouldn't know what sort of characteristic it was supposed to distinguish.

        – stevesliva
        3 hours ago
















      4


















      If it avoids catastrophic failure, it exhibits:




      graceful degradation - Graceful degradation is the ability of a computer, machine, electronic system or network to maintain limited functionality even when a large portion of it has been destroyed or rendered inoperative. The purpose of graceful degradation is to prevent catastrophic failure. Ideally, even the simultaneous loss of multiple components does not cause downtime




      I do not think you will find one word for these things. They are not "working" as designed... they have failed. They simply have failed in a way that doesn't completely destroy their utility, but that's not to say the couldn't fail that way. The wheels could fall off the moped, the brush on the electric toothbrush could break off.



      You're more describing a failure mode than a specific variety of things. So, another answer geared at a description, rather than one word.






      share|improve this answer


























      • I think he's looking for something that is understandable without jargon, not so much a single word. I like this answer, though.

        – David M
        6 hours ago











      • Graceful degradation is more for things like each node on the net continuing to function even when other nodes are failing or misbehaving. It does not mean that you can still use your PC as a limited computer if the power is off.

        – puppetsock
        5 hours ago











      • Its used in an aviation context here aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43919/… ... meaning you can fly the plane even when some electronic components fail

        – stevesliva
        5 hours ago











      • I'm not sure the term has made the leap from electronics to humble electricals.

        – Edwin Ashworth
        4 hours ago











      • I'm not sure where I picked it up. I recalled "graceful" used with regards to failure to distinguish from catastrophic failure. I like the terminology because it requires no real definition to understand. But what I found interesting in the aviation link is that failsoft was used, and if the OP really wants something that pithy, there it is. But if someone threw failsoft at me, I wouldn't know what sort of characteristic it was supposed to distinguish.

        – stevesliva
        3 hours ago














      4














      4










      4









      If it avoids catastrophic failure, it exhibits:




      graceful degradation - Graceful degradation is the ability of a computer, machine, electronic system or network to maintain limited functionality even when a large portion of it has been destroyed or rendered inoperative. The purpose of graceful degradation is to prevent catastrophic failure. Ideally, even the simultaneous loss of multiple components does not cause downtime




      I do not think you will find one word for these things. They are not "working" as designed... they have failed. They simply have failed in a way that doesn't completely destroy their utility, but that's not to say the couldn't fail that way. The wheels could fall off the moped, the brush on the electric toothbrush could break off.



      You're more describing a failure mode than a specific variety of things. So, another answer geared at a description, rather than one word.






      share|improve this answer














      If it avoids catastrophic failure, it exhibits:




      graceful degradation - Graceful degradation is the ability of a computer, machine, electronic system or network to maintain limited functionality even when a large portion of it has been destroyed or rendered inoperative. The purpose of graceful degradation is to prevent catastrophic failure. Ideally, even the simultaneous loss of multiple components does not cause downtime




      I do not think you will find one word for these things. They are not "working" as designed... they have failed. They simply have failed in a way that doesn't completely destroy their utility, but that's not to say the couldn't fail that way. The wheels could fall off the moped, the brush on the electric toothbrush could break off.



      You're more describing a failure mode than a specific variety of things. So, another answer geared at a description, rather than one word.







      share|improve this answer













      share|improve this answer




      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered 6 hours ago









      steveslivastevesliva

      4,69113 silver badges18 bronze badges




      4,69113 silver badges18 bronze badges















      • I think he's looking for something that is understandable without jargon, not so much a single word. I like this answer, though.

        – David M
        6 hours ago











      • Graceful degradation is more for things like each node on the net continuing to function even when other nodes are failing or misbehaving. It does not mean that you can still use your PC as a limited computer if the power is off.

        – puppetsock
        5 hours ago











      • Its used in an aviation context here aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43919/… ... meaning you can fly the plane even when some electronic components fail

        – stevesliva
        5 hours ago











      • I'm not sure the term has made the leap from electronics to humble electricals.

        – Edwin Ashworth
        4 hours ago











      • I'm not sure where I picked it up. I recalled "graceful" used with regards to failure to distinguish from catastrophic failure. I like the terminology because it requires no real definition to understand. But what I found interesting in the aviation link is that failsoft was used, and if the OP really wants something that pithy, there it is. But if someone threw failsoft at me, I wouldn't know what sort of characteristic it was supposed to distinguish.

        – stevesliva
        3 hours ago


















      • I think he's looking for something that is understandable without jargon, not so much a single word. I like this answer, though.

        – David M
        6 hours ago











      • Graceful degradation is more for things like each node on the net continuing to function even when other nodes are failing or misbehaving. It does not mean that you can still use your PC as a limited computer if the power is off.

        – puppetsock
        5 hours ago











      • Its used in an aviation context here aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43919/… ... meaning you can fly the plane even when some electronic components fail

        – stevesliva
        5 hours ago











      • I'm not sure the term has made the leap from electronics to humble electricals.

        – Edwin Ashworth
        4 hours ago











      • I'm not sure where I picked it up. I recalled "graceful" used with regards to failure to distinguish from catastrophic failure. I like the terminology because it requires no real definition to understand. But what I found interesting in the aviation link is that failsoft was used, and if the OP really wants something that pithy, there it is. But if someone threw failsoft at me, I wouldn't know what sort of characteristic it was supposed to distinguish.

        – stevesliva
        3 hours ago

















      I think he's looking for something that is understandable without jargon, not so much a single word. I like this answer, though.

      – David M
      6 hours ago





      I think he's looking for something that is understandable without jargon, not so much a single word. I like this answer, though.

      – David M
      6 hours ago













      Graceful degradation is more for things like each node on the net continuing to function even when other nodes are failing or misbehaving. It does not mean that you can still use your PC as a limited computer if the power is off.

      – puppetsock
      5 hours ago





      Graceful degradation is more for things like each node on the net continuing to function even when other nodes are failing or misbehaving. It does not mean that you can still use your PC as a limited computer if the power is off.

      – puppetsock
      5 hours ago













      Its used in an aviation context here aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43919/… ... meaning you can fly the plane even when some electronic components fail

      – stevesliva
      5 hours ago





      Its used in an aviation context here aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43919/… ... meaning you can fly the plane even when some electronic components fail

      – stevesliva
      5 hours ago













      I'm not sure the term has made the leap from electronics to humble electricals.

      – Edwin Ashworth
      4 hours ago





      I'm not sure the term has made the leap from electronics to humble electricals.

      – Edwin Ashworth
      4 hours ago













      I'm not sure where I picked it up. I recalled "graceful" used with regards to failure to distinguish from catastrophic failure. I like the terminology because it requires no real definition to understand. But what I found interesting in the aviation link is that failsoft was used, and if the OP really wants something that pithy, there it is. But if someone threw failsoft at me, I wouldn't know what sort of characteristic it was supposed to distinguish.

      – stevesliva
      3 hours ago






      I'm not sure where I picked it up. I recalled "graceful" used with regards to failure to distinguish from catastrophic failure. I like the terminology because it requires no real definition to understand. But what I found interesting in the aviation link is that failsoft was used, and if the OP really wants something that pithy, there it is. But if someone threw failsoft at me, I wouldn't know what sort of characteristic it was supposed to distinguish.

      – stevesliva
      3 hours ago














      2


















      These designs feature inherent utility.



      Their design features an intrinsic quality that makes them utile even when they're not fully functional. In fact, you could use the word intrinsic instead of inherent.



      These are not standard phrases, but I think are understandable on their faces.



      Also consider redundant utility.



      ==========



      Additional answer:



      We can also say the design of these devices has a built-in fail-safe.



      Fail-Safe




      1 : incorporating some feature for automatically counteracting the effect of an anticipated possible source of failure.







      share|improve this answer




























      • I agree with this though I prefer useful to utile as I prefer stink to fetor. :)

        – Lambie
        6 hours ago











      • @Lambie Fetor is a perfectly cromulent word.

        – David M
        6 hours ago











      • I think "inherent" is way difficult to define. Which is more inherent, riding a powered moped, or pedaling a dead one? Redundant would be if there was a second escalator right next to the first one.

        – puppetsock
        5 hours ago












      • You should point out that these aren't as used here standard phrases, and that 'functional utility' already has a (different) meaning. I'm sure OP is asking for a standard word or phrase to be suggested, rather than a sensible-looking juxtaposition.

        – Edwin Ashworth
        4 hours ago












      • @puppetsock I didn't say most inherent. Rather the the utility is inherent to the design, i.e. at its core.

        – David M
        1 hour ago
















      2


















      These designs feature inherent utility.



      Their design features an intrinsic quality that makes them utile even when they're not fully functional. In fact, you could use the word intrinsic instead of inherent.



      These are not standard phrases, but I think are understandable on their faces.



      Also consider redundant utility.



      ==========



      Additional answer:



      We can also say the design of these devices has a built-in fail-safe.



      Fail-Safe




      1 : incorporating some feature for automatically counteracting the effect of an anticipated possible source of failure.







      share|improve this answer




























      • I agree with this though I prefer useful to utile as I prefer stink to fetor. :)

        – Lambie
        6 hours ago











      • @Lambie Fetor is a perfectly cromulent word.

        – David M
        6 hours ago











      • I think "inherent" is way difficult to define. Which is more inherent, riding a powered moped, or pedaling a dead one? Redundant would be if there was a second escalator right next to the first one.

        – puppetsock
        5 hours ago












      • You should point out that these aren't as used here standard phrases, and that 'functional utility' already has a (different) meaning. I'm sure OP is asking for a standard word or phrase to be suggested, rather than a sensible-looking juxtaposition.

        – Edwin Ashworth
        4 hours ago












      • @puppetsock I didn't say most inherent. Rather the the utility is inherent to the design, i.e. at its core.

        – David M
        1 hour ago














      2














      2










      2









      These designs feature inherent utility.



      Their design features an intrinsic quality that makes them utile even when they're not fully functional. In fact, you could use the word intrinsic instead of inherent.



      These are not standard phrases, but I think are understandable on their faces.



      Also consider redundant utility.



      ==========



      Additional answer:



      We can also say the design of these devices has a built-in fail-safe.



      Fail-Safe




      1 : incorporating some feature for automatically counteracting the effect of an anticipated possible source of failure.







      share|improve this answer
















      These designs feature inherent utility.



      Their design features an intrinsic quality that makes them utile even when they're not fully functional. In fact, you could use the word intrinsic instead of inherent.



      These are not standard phrases, but I think are understandable on their faces.



      Also consider redundant utility.



      ==========



      Additional answer:



      We can also say the design of these devices has a built-in fail-safe.



      Fail-Safe




      1 : incorporating some feature for automatically counteracting the effect of an anticipated possible source of failure.








      share|improve this answer















      share|improve this answer




      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 1 hour ago

























      answered 8 hours ago









      David MDavid M

      17.3k8 gold badges57 silver badges108 bronze badges




      17.3k8 gold badges57 silver badges108 bronze badges















      • I agree with this though I prefer useful to utile as I prefer stink to fetor. :)

        – Lambie
        6 hours ago











      • @Lambie Fetor is a perfectly cromulent word.

        – David M
        6 hours ago











      • I think "inherent" is way difficult to define. Which is more inherent, riding a powered moped, or pedaling a dead one? Redundant would be if there was a second escalator right next to the first one.

        – puppetsock
        5 hours ago












      • You should point out that these aren't as used here standard phrases, and that 'functional utility' already has a (different) meaning. I'm sure OP is asking for a standard word or phrase to be suggested, rather than a sensible-looking juxtaposition.

        – Edwin Ashworth
        4 hours ago












      • @puppetsock I didn't say most inherent. Rather the the utility is inherent to the design, i.e. at its core.

        – David M
        1 hour ago


















      • I agree with this though I prefer useful to utile as I prefer stink to fetor. :)

        – Lambie
        6 hours ago











      • @Lambie Fetor is a perfectly cromulent word.

        – David M
        6 hours ago











      • I think "inherent" is way difficult to define. Which is more inherent, riding a powered moped, or pedaling a dead one? Redundant would be if there was a second escalator right next to the first one.

        – puppetsock
        5 hours ago












      • You should point out that these aren't as used here standard phrases, and that 'functional utility' already has a (different) meaning. I'm sure OP is asking for a standard word or phrase to be suggested, rather than a sensible-looking juxtaposition.

        – Edwin Ashworth
        4 hours ago












      • @puppetsock I didn't say most inherent. Rather the the utility is inherent to the design, i.e. at its core.

        – David M
        1 hour ago

















      I agree with this though I prefer useful to utile as I prefer stink to fetor. :)

      – Lambie
      6 hours ago





      I agree with this though I prefer useful to utile as I prefer stink to fetor. :)

      – Lambie
      6 hours ago













      @Lambie Fetor is a perfectly cromulent word.

      – David M
      6 hours ago





      @Lambie Fetor is a perfectly cromulent word.

      – David M
      6 hours ago













      I think "inherent" is way difficult to define. Which is more inherent, riding a powered moped, or pedaling a dead one? Redundant would be if there was a second escalator right next to the first one.

      – puppetsock
      5 hours ago






      I think "inherent" is way difficult to define. Which is more inherent, riding a powered moped, or pedaling a dead one? Redundant would be if there was a second escalator right next to the first one.

      – puppetsock
      5 hours ago














      You should point out that these aren't as used here standard phrases, and that 'functional utility' already has a (different) meaning. I'm sure OP is asking for a standard word or phrase to be suggested, rather than a sensible-looking juxtaposition.

      – Edwin Ashworth
      4 hours ago






      You should point out that these aren't as used here standard phrases, and that 'functional utility' already has a (different) meaning. I'm sure OP is asking for a standard word or phrase to be suggested, rather than a sensible-looking juxtaposition.

      – Edwin Ashworth
      4 hours ago














      @puppetsock I didn't say most inherent. Rather the the utility is inherent to the design, i.e. at its core.

      – David M
      1 hour ago






      @puppetsock I didn't say most inherent. Rather the the utility is inherent to the design, i.e. at its core.

      – David M
      1 hour ago












      0


















      Alternate Mode Machines - auto to manual?






      share|improve this answer









      New contributor



      tblue is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.

























        0


















        Alternate Mode Machines - auto to manual?






        share|improve this answer









        New contributor



        tblue is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.























          0














          0










          0









          Alternate Mode Machines - auto to manual?






          share|improve this answer









          New contributor



          tblue is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          Alternate Mode Machines - auto to manual?







          share|improve this answer









          New contributor



          tblue is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.








          share|improve this answer




          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer






          New contributor



          tblue is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.








          answered 1 hour ago









          tbluetblue

          1011 bronze badge




          1011 bronze badge




          New contributor



          tblue is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.




          New contributor




          tblue is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.


























              0


















              These machines are manually operable.



              Assuming one mode as powered by a motor as automatic and a secondary non-powered mode of use as manual such as in the case of escalators or mopeds, all of these items have the same in common. They can be operated manually.






              share|improve this answer






























                0


















                These machines are manually operable.



                Assuming one mode as powered by a motor as automatic and a secondary non-powered mode of use as manual such as in the case of escalators or mopeds, all of these items have the same in common. They can be operated manually.






                share|improve this answer




























                  0














                  0










                  0









                  These machines are manually operable.



                  Assuming one mode as powered by a motor as automatic and a secondary non-powered mode of use as manual such as in the case of escalators or mopeds, all of these items have the same in common. They can be operated manually.






                  share|improve this answer














                  These machines are manually operable.



                  Assuming one mode as powered by a motor as automatic and a secondary non-powered mode of use as manual such as in the case of escalators or mopeds, all of these items have the same in common. They can be operated manually.







                  share|improve this answer













                  share|improve this answer




                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 48 mins ago









                  psosunapsosuna

                  2,1324 silver badges16 bronze badges




                  2,1324 silver badges16 bronze badges































                      draft saved

                      draft discarded















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f514454%2fwhat-is-the-word-for-things-that-work-even-when-they-arent-working-e-g-escala%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown









                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

                      Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

                      François Viète Contents Biography Work and thought Bibliography See also Notes Further reading External links Navigation menup. 21Google Bookspp. 75–77Google BooksDe thou (from University of Saint Andrews)ArchivedGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle booksGoogle Bookscc-parthenay.frL'histoire universelle (fr)Universal History (en)ArchivedAdsabs.harvard.eduPagesperso-orange.frArchive.orgChikara Sasaki. Descartes' mathematical thought p.259Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle Bookspp. 152 and onwardGoogle BooksGoogle BooksScribd.comGoogle Books1257-7979Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGallica.bnf.frGoogle BooksGoogle Books"François Viète"Francois Viète: Father of Modern Algebraic NotationThe Lawyer and the GamblerAbout TarporleySite de Jean-Paul GuichardL'algèbre nouvelle"About the Harmonicon"cb120511976(data)1188044800000 0001 0913 5903n82164680ola2013766880073431702w6vt1sb70287374827140948071409480