• GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    The sub is about technology, not industry. Also, look at the advances in battery technology in the last 30 years. There have only been 3 notable technology advances in the last 40 years from a consumer perspective, but there have been significant advances within each of those major technology changes, resulting in Wh/kg increasing by 6 to 10 times and $/Wh dropping about 99%.

    If you want to hear about things that could happen or are about to start happening in industry, this is the right community. If you want to know what you can buy tomorrow, try Amazon.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Feels weird to gatekeep that - the des says ‘news or articles’ so an article about some ancient tech isn’t for this community?

      I understand it as anything tech related, that explains/talks about technology, manufacturing tech included.

      The ‘not industry’ part as in macroeconomics & geopolitical stuff - I agree on that.

      • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        The point is not about this particular article, but the general attitude of that comment, which boils down to “Why is there an article about a technological breakthrough that may never pan out in my community about technology?” I feel like these guys would have complained about Newton’s quaint ideas for a new way to use mathematics. The fact this particular article is about technology that is demonstrably taking off while they complain about articles on battery tech not being implemented is pretty next level.

        • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Oh, I see.
          I was just commenting on ‘this community isn’t about industry’ bcs I didn’t quite understand that (but my comment was a bit unclear, should have added the quote I was referring to).

          • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            All good. I just keep seeing this all the time about batteries, simply because most of the technological advances are slow, cumulative, aggregate, and largely invisible to consumers. Then people complain about how none of these advances ever make it to market while ignoring, for example, how many pounds old, barely capable cell phones were compared to the functionality of smartphones these days that can run for a full day on a battery a fraction of the size we had for those old behemoths, all apparently without any of those breakthroughs making it to market. I mean, look at the first cell phone in this article. I suspect some advancements occurred in batteries between then and now.

            • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Oh, I’m fully aware how battery tech advanced and/or awkwardly staggered in some areas.
              Phones are a great example, the rise of capacities through diffident technologies were fast & very close for people to experience first hand.

              I just wish we would have started this push a century ago.

              • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 minutes ago

                Absolutely. If we had done so with batteries and solar, imagine where we could have been. Both technologies languished for far longer than they had to.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      resulting in Wh/kg increasing by 6 to 10 times and $/Wh dropping about 99%.

      And yet, a Tesla model S costs $10,000 more than 2012.

      • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I’ll take out of context quotes for $100, Alex.

        Those changes are over 40 years, only 13 years of which apply to your reference, and include only one component of a luxury vehicle. Also, the current base price for a Tesla Model S that it showed me was $150k. If we apply inflation to $140k since 2012 ($150k minus the $10k you said), we get a value of $197k. So, $47k cheaper in 2025 dollars.

        I suppose you blame battery prices for why McDonalds costs more, too?

      • Soup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Tesla, the company run by a nazi capitalist and which has a value so inflated it’s amazing it hasn’t imploded under its own weight, raises it’s prices and you’re blaming batteries? You do know that every saving a corporation makes goes towards profits and that they never lower their prices as long as people are buying(and even then, they refuse to most of the time)?

        There’s correlation not equalling causation and then there’s whatever the hell this is. Like one of the final bosses of that logical fallacy.