Pelicanen

Depends on on what they’re trying to convince people of. I see a few options:

1. They believe they are close to a breakthrough and just need a little bit more funding to get all the way there. I don’t see this as likely because then they wouldn’t have come out with such extraordinary claims straight out of the gate.

2. They want to fool potential customers into buying their products. Also not likely for the same reason you said, no one is going to include a product into their production line without verifying things first.

3. They want to fool investors into buying the company. This is what I think is going on, they want enough breadcrumbs so that people who want to come out ahead of the big players (CATL, QuantumScape, Solid Power) will let their fear of missing out outweigh their skepticism and go all-in, then just cash out before anyone realizes it was a bluff.

As someone in the industry, I unfortunately highly doubt that the battery is real, at least in the way that they say it is. Individually, all of the claimed specs are within the realm of possibility, but combining all of them in one cell that supposedly does not contain lithium and is cheap to produce? Extremely unlikely.

What I suspect is that they have one or a few expensive laboratory-made cells that fulfill at least the performance claims so they can raise interest, but which are in no way possible to produce at a reasonable price point.

If it’s truly a solid-state battery, thermal management is less of an issue since they won’t be limited to the usual -10 - 60 °C range which makes it easier to dissipate heat into the environment.

What makes me suspicious is that they claimed that the battery can operate at/above 100 °C safely without degradation, but in the 11C charging test they paused it because the temperature had reached 90 °C.

SailfishOS is still very much a thing and they have a brand new phone on the way. Since it hasn’t been released yet it’s hard to get into specifics, but early interest seems to point in a positive direction at least.

That’s usually how it works. Why is that relevant?

Sell two, wait until the crash, and upgrade for less money. Win-win!

I’m not sure I entirely agree anymore. I’ve installed Mint OS on both my mother’s and my grandmother’s computers and neither of them have complained a single time about it to me. Setting up a printer was even easier, I tried helping an acquaintance with W11 set up a printer and it was hell, with Mint it just figured out everything relevant on its own, I just had to confirm that it was correct.

It doesn’t have to be true, it just has to convince his base and that’s a low bar.

I can add that in my experience, switching to Linux tends to have a positive impact on performance and keep the laptop usable for longer, I highly recommend you try it with your current laptop.

To be fair, they’re already part of the Union whether they want to or not, it’s more a matter of if they get to have political representation or not.

Unfortunately, a large percentage of the voting population seems to support them, which is part of how we got here in the first place. The best argument for a free and open democracy is what happens with any of the alternatives, but people have a tendency to forget, and opportunists are great at using difficult times to garner support.

If this continues unopposed, yes, but asking individuals in specific situations to sacrifice their own lives without an organized community does not sound reasonable to me.

Making large groups of people that all agree with you spontaneously appear at a location is typically not super easy.

And lose your jobs, your homes, and your freedom in the process as you get prosecuted for assaulting federal agents where the authorities have an incentive to make an example out of you to deter future incidents.

I’m not expecting the world to change from holding hands and singing hymns, but insulting people (who already started confronting them instead of just pretending not to see) for not sacrificing more than I’d have to seems rather narrow-minded to me.

then because of the mods who moved from Reddit to here. They hated that their power was taken away on Reddit so they jumped ship and now get to make their own rules without having to answer to Reddit admins

Combined with your earlier comments, this seems like saying that moderators only moved to Lemmy because they wanted more power which seems almost revisionist. Moderating is a shitty job, a lot of people do it just because they care about their online communities, and many moderators moved from Reddit to Lemmy specifically because they cared about their communities and how what Reddit was doing was ruining them.

Most of them just defederate from any instance that doesn’t highly censor views they don’t like

So, what is your alternative? We should force people to be on platforms that they don’t want and have to spend all day blocking people who thrives on antagonizing them? You can just go on those other instances, you don’t have to interact with the ones that are, in your words, so authoritarian.

If you don’t ban people they don’t need to create multiple accounts. You just block and move on and they’ll continue doing their thing while you don’t see it. Win-win.

Why wouldn’t they create more accounts to get around the blocks? Not to mention other reasons for making more accounts, for example making it seem like your opinion has more widespread support than it actually does.

You’re a typical “everyone I disagree with is a Nazi bigot” who craves censorship and authoritarian leadership because you can’t handle people having differing opinions by the looks of it

And now it sounds like you ran out of things to say, so the only thing left is to try and discredit my character. I am fine with people having different opinions than I do, that’s how the world works, but it sounds to me like you’re suggesting that discussing income tax rates is the same as disagreeing with someone about whether genocide is acceptable or not. They’re not the same thing. Having good-faith discourse and pushing disinformation are not the same thing.

It should be on the onus of the person being a dick to stop being a dick to get to interact with others in their communities, not for the people who aren’t being dicks to spend a bunch of their time and energy having to filter out all the dicks. If you disagree with that, you can whenever you want, go to a different community where people have the same opinion as you, but saying that people only want moderation because they can’t handle someone else’s opinion without “losing their minds” sounds disingenuous at best.

Where did you address them? You just claim that

almost every Lemmy instance is the same, many significantly worse in terms of how authoritarian they are

Without any explanation for why that would be the case whereas I have not have at all had the same experience. Therefore, I don’t see how it relates to federated social media at all.

Furthermore, you just state that

some of us just want a place with zero bans and which unless you break the law with your speech, zero bans and moderation

And to just “block them and move on”. Honestly, I don’t want my time using social media to be spent having to personally block multiple accounts (by people who will probably make more accounts) because they’re racists, misogynists, foreign bot farms, etc. Furthermore, I don’t want my content and my comments to be used, knowingly or otherwise, to prop up comment sections and threads that are spreading disinformation and bigotry.

If you want that, that’s fine. Go to one of those places. But from what I’ve seen, they are usually where nazis end up congregating, which is one reason why I (and at least some other people) prefer to avoid them.

As you mentioned, Reddit had a huge problem with moderators who banned without just cause so this is in no way related to decentralization. If you want zero moderation then you’re free to join one of the instances that have that as a guiding principle, but that is almost inevitably where all the nazis end up, which is why the rest of us avoid them.

This is the worst thing I’ve seen all week.

I love it.

But it still plays into the narrative that everyone should be afraid of supporting Ukraine because you never know what Putin might do, with the added bonus that it make it seem like Trump isn’t his lapdog.

When has Putin shown disdain at being called crazy? If I remember correctly, a lot of world leaders have instead claimed that seeming crazy has been one of Putin’s tactics to avoid being challenged as people are afraid of what a crazy person might do, especially one that rules a country with one of the world’s largest armies and the largest nuclear arsenal.