• Warl0k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    56 minutes ago

    Oh cool! Electrify America started rolling out this tech a few months ago and it’s been crazy nice to have the full 350kw charging available at rural stations.

      • WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        How so? The “article” reads very much like blatantly breathless hype. I have no problem with the company, or this development of theirs. I just hate reading what reads like uncritical marketing fluff.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 hour ago

          The article is full of actual numbers, and anybody with a functioning brain can see why this is an important technological development. The fact that you have an issue with the style of the article doesn’t diminish the achievement in any way.

          • lemmyout@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            I agree with Wholz. The article is basically a whole lot of "Huawei says… ". No independent opinion, critique, doubts, agreement from another source, anything.

            Reads like a press release from corpo.

            Edit: OP this is not a criticism of your posting. I’m criticizing the article.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              52 minutes ago

              Yes, the article is covering an announcement by Huawei. There’s literally zero reason to assume that Huawei is lying about any of this. Everything doesn’t need to be framed as both sides kind of argument. Also, anybody can go look up technical specs that are published if they don’t trust the figures in the article. This whole drama is just so weird to me.

              • WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                38 minutes ago

                Nobody said they were lying per se. Marketing types do tend to push the limits of what the truth is, however - mentioning only best case scenarios rather than what users will experience in real life, for example (e.g. perfectly controlled temperatures in the testing lab vs. out in the heat at the installation).

                I have no way of knowing for sure whether they are guilty of that, but it’s tedious to wade through all the superlatives to parse what the likely reality actually is. To be fair, however, that may just be an effect of living under western modus operandis, and they are more on the up-and-up over there. The way the piece is written sure doesn’t look good to me for that possibility, however.

          • WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Defensive much? I already stated I had no problem with anything but the way the information is presented. If you like reading overblown marketing hype, that’s fine. I’m very much a “just the facts” type, and so don’t. I know I’m not alone in that perspective, which is why I was attempting to warn others what to expect.