Lithium deactivation is inversely proportional to capacity. We could just add extra capacity to make up for it, though. From there, the battery would maintain capacity for a longer time than before.
> We could just add extra capacity to make up for it, though.
At naive face value, "just" adding an extra 30% capacity to offset expected lithium deactivation implies proportional increases in material COGS and package mass/volume, all other factors being equal.
Unless (a) a manufacturer is optimizing for throughput; (b) production is constrained at this initial charge stage; and (c) supply substantially lags demand; this strikes me as a non-starter in most of the consumer space.
Extra 21% capacity. Current practice still burns 9%. Lithium batteries have become very cheap, and I would pay a markup for a 50% longer battery life, assuming it didn't (a) further normalize non-replaceable batteries in consumer electronics or (b) lead to even worse conditions for the quasi-slaves currently mining lithium. Unfortunately, I doubt either of those will hold.
> Extra 21% capacity. Current practice still burns 9%.
On a normalized basis, if current practice yields 91% finished capacity (i.e. 9% deactivation loss), and the new proposed process is expected to yield 70% finished capacity (i.e. 30% deactivation loss), then the question is how much initial material must the new proposed process start with to end with the equivalent finished capacity as the current practice?
I didn't see anything in that in that wikipedia article about it. Besides, the claims of defectors are frequently exaggerated and fall apart. They have a strong tendency to try to say what they think their audience want to hear.
While I agree with most of the assessment, I think that checkbox is fine. Removing the set of motorized haptic control levers and the motorized steering wheel at the brigde is a problem. Had the designers needed to integrate the feedback forces, they could have visualized them on the gui only stations too.
"The interests of people in the thyroid gland have always been immense because of the widespread prevalence of its diseases. Therefore the earliest references to the gland date back to 1st century AD. The Chinese, Egyptian, Indian, Greek and Byzantine medicines are especially rich in their knowledge on the subject."
Clippy, if activated, always added an unnecessary step in accessing the help file. Clippy was in part bad, because the help file had a mostly useless index, leading to no or wrong answers for Clippy.
The content in the help file was additionally less than accurate, it lacked usage examples and a FAQ section that could have been used for recognizing and offering a solution to a question.
The difficult part of creating an assistant is recognizing the users' problems and offering solutions. It's the kind of experience a company can acquire with years of tech support or lots of lab testing.
Then it would have to compile that knowledge in an expert system and give it away essentiality for free.
Companies that prioritize development and/or support over documentation shouldn't try to create an assistant for the same reasons. But if you have great documentation, a great support knowledgebase, and support scripts, creating an assistant out of it will someday become as easy as keeping a Juypter notebook running.
Clippy was hated whether he was right or not. Consider the most popular catchphrase "It looks like you're writing a letter..."
In my experience, Clippy was never wrong about that - precision and recall were absolutely perfect - but people do not appreciate being interrupted, particularly at the precise moment their work has begun.
The hard part of creating an assistant is not coming up with some stuff to suggest, it's coming up with a time, place, and manner to make those suggestions so that users might be open to them.
> creating an assistant out of it will someday become as easy as keeping a Juypter notebook running.
Absolutely true, but if you intend for that assistant to proactively inject itself into people's lives, get ready to be held to an unimaginably high bar of quality.
You could check "Don't show me this tip again". That's why I don't remember it as the main problem with Clippy. I agree that it was a bad idea in the first place to interrupt a user's action. Finding the right time and manner to offer a suggestion is a hard problem even for a human being.
Yes, that's how it is. For every reform that would benefit society as a whole, there is now a tiny minority of certain losers with a deeply entrenched lobby against the new and for the old. Be it fossil fuels, health care, banking, peace in the Middle East, nuclear technology, the use of genetic engineering in plant breeding, electric vehicles, and so on.
I don't think UBI would change that, but UBI might have a chance to change the perception of one's job as a bullshit job (they say that's 40% of the workforce).
Excellent point and phrasing! And it suggests what needs to be done to move things along: (a) make them not losers & (b) decrease the ability to entrench lobbying.
To (a), I don't think we do enough of directly buying out stakeholders. E.g. if we know moving to single-payer insurance would be beneficial to the system as a whole (we probably don't, but just an example), why not explicitly pay off private insurance companies, phased out over 10 years? Everyone would still win!
To (b), the key is the corruption of should-be-objective decisions. To me, regulatory-industry revolving doors are the most important, because they're the greatest source of invisible-at-the-time corruption (e.g. you sway a decision... 15 years later you get a cushy "retirement job" in industry). Fundamentally, I don't think there's a way you get around that, absent banning it (above a certain level of regulatory authority) and substituting equivalent economic compensation. Continuously finding selfless, competent people to staff regulatory services is not a sustainable model. So pay them so the "selfless" isn't a requirement (even if you have to tax industry more heavily to do so).
I just did a quick review on Amazon of adapters ranging from 30 to 120W. Not a single one claimed to support 5V/5A DC. Only a couple claimed 5V/4.5A and they were expensive. 5V/3A is common in the $15+ category.
Tested with uBlock Origin on Firefox Mobile.