this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
366 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

76339 readers
3978 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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 1 points 1 day 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 0 points 1 day ago (3 children)

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.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 12 hours ago

It's not just Musk. All the legacy automakers switched fast to EVs because of the higher profit margins, and have been obfuscating the fact that at recent battery prices, EVs should cost less than ICE. To try and add value, they festoon the vehicles with pointless gadgetry and screens, which of course will all fail long before the battery. By Design.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

But Elon told us EVs cost more than ICE because of battery costs. There are hundreds less components in EV versus ICE, and there could be even less if they removed the pointless gadgetry. As for the McDonalds comment, which makes no sense, maybe loosen your ponytail elastic.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 12 hours ago

The McDonalds point is in reference to inflation, which will certainly have an impact on the cost of vehicles. And I feel like you don't grasp the concept of a luxury vehicle. By definition, it has more than the basics. This could be why my EV cost less than $20k used and a Model S costs $151k new. No ponytail, but I don't expect having one would hinder my basic math, economics, or English comprehension skills.

[–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

look at EV prices in china for a more accurate depiction of the battery progress that is being made

apparently the government EV subsidy for outright purchases ended in 2022, but they're good enough at the manufacturing now that EVs are still exceptionally cheap. 70-80% of world lithium-ion production also takes place in China, so it makes sense.

There's a lot of reasons that I don't like the Chinese government, but they have been doing a whole lot better than the rest of the world with investment into the future of technology from what I've seen. The number of top-rated CS and EE schools in China is doing a whole lot on its own.