Batteries is probably one of thew most researched technologies ATM. So asking for more research and less talking when the progress of actual research is publicized is just moronic idiotic, and everything else describing ignorance.
The comment is satire. You get reports about amazing batteries about every month, yet most pretty much all of them never went into production. It has been like that for years, since I was a teenager at the very least. And what has happened since then was pretty much refinements to Li-Ion and the commercialization LiFePO.
It has been like that since Volta started making stacks of different metal plates and making dead frogs dance. It might surprise you to learn that making subatomic particles dance to our whim at a pace we determine isn’t very easy. We try all kinds of neat ideas to make them do this, and some of them even work. The fact that people like you see all the times we try and it doesn’t work as an indicator that we aren’t trying very hard rather than researchers trying very hard and not always being as successful as we’d like is more an indictment of you than it is of them.
Also, unlike when I started watching advances in batteries, you can find the history of rechargeable batteries with just a few minutes of web searching. If you had put in even that little bit of effort, you would know that advances in rechargeable batteries neither started nor ended with lithium.
It usually is at least a decade. New modern technology and manufacturing processes take years to decades to get up to speed because of all the hiccups and surprises they find along the way.
You called their comment “ignorant and misleading.” Do you actually stand behind those words?
So asking for more research and less talking when the progress of actual research is publicized is just moronic idiotic, and everything else describing ignorance.
They didn’t ask for “more research.” They were asking for more of these cheap and effective batteries to be available for them to purchase.
Less talk and more delivery is the same as increasing investments in research and production even more than they already are. To deliver even better batteries even faster requires more research. I was using the logical conclusion of what was said.
So yes I absolutely 100% stand by my original comment, because there is absolutely a lot more than talking, when it’s the area that is probably seeing some of the heaviest research for more than 2 decades now. And there absolutely is delivering too.
Of course we all want even better and cheaper batteries, it’s a braindead comment to make. I also wish there were more pink unicorns.
Great, so I guess you’ll talk specifically about why it was both “ignorant” and “misleading”.
Of course we all want even better and cheaper batteries, it’s a braindead comment to make.
Whoops. It seems you failed to say anything about why the comment was “ignorant” or “misleading”. Even if you accept it’s “braindead”, and I don’t, that only means it’s not using brain power, like the author is just on autopilot, and doesn’t mean “ignorant.”
Of course, it would have been an impossible endeavor to prove your point, because their comment was neither ignorant nor misleading.
Anyways, I’m done here. I’ll be reporting you for violating Rule 3 and blocking you.
“Less talking. More X,” is a cliche that doesn’t imply that there is zero “X.”
I think you’re fundamentally misunderstanding their comment and then attributing your mistake to them as if it’s their mistake.
Batteries is probably one of thew most researched technologies ATM. So asking for more research and less talking when the progress of actual research is publicized is just moronic idiotic, and everything else describing ignorance.
The comment is satire. You get reports about amazing batteries about every month, yet
mostpretty much all of them never went into production. It has been like that for years, since I was a teenager at the very least. And what has happened since then was pretty much refinements to Li-Ion and the commercialization LiFePO.It has been like that since Volta started making stacks of different metal plates and making dead frogs dance. It might surprise you to learn that making subatomic particles dance to our whim at a pace we determine isn’t very easy. We try all kinds of neat ideas to make them do this, and some of them even work. The fact that people like you see all the times we try and it doesn’t work as an indicator that we aren’t trying very hard rather than researchers trying very hard and not always being as successful as we’d like is more an indictment of you than it is of them.
Also, unlike when I started watching advances in batteries, you can find the history of rechargeable batteries with just a few minutes of web searching. If you had put in even that little bit of effort, you would know that advances in rechargeable batteries neither started nor ended with lithium.
The timeline from research to “in my products” feels like a decade.
It usually is at least a decade. New modern technology and manufacturing processes take years to decades to get up to speed because of all the hiccups and surprises they find along the way.
You called their comment “ignorant and misleading.” Do you actually stand behind those words?
They didn’t ask for “more research.” They were asking for more of these cheap and effective batteries to be available for them to purchase.
Less talk and more delivery is the same as increasing investments in research and production even more than they already are. To deliver even better batteries even faster requires more research. I was using the logical conclusion of what was said.
So yes I absolutely 100% stand by my original comment, because there is absolutely a lot more than talking, when it’s the area that is probably seeing some of the heaviest research for more than 2 decades now. And there absolutely is delivering too.
Of course we all want even better and cheaper batteries, it’s a braindead comment to make. I also wish there were more pink unicorns.
Great, so I guess you’ll talk specifically about why it was both “ignorant” and “misleading”.
Whoops. It seems you failed to say anything about why the comment was “ignorant” or “misleading”. Even if you accept it’s “braindead”, and I don’t, that only means it’s not using brain power, like the author is just on autopilot, and doesn’t mean “ignorant.”
Of course, it would have been an impossible endeavor to prove your point, because their comment was neither ignorant nor misleading.
Anyways, I’m done here. I’ll be reporting you for violating Rule 3 and blocking you.
My unicorn is invisible and pink.
That’s the best kind.