this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2026
328 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

81118 readers
4697 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@piefed.ca 19 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

And yet we have somehow gone from rechargeable phone batteries that were about 3 times bigger than the phone I'm typing this on and had a capacity of about 500 mAh to where we are now with the battery that powers my phone being some small part of it and having a capacity of 3000 mAh, with only two major technology changes on the way. Meanwhile, we've been using the same technology for over a decade and the capability keeps getting better. I wonder why that is?

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Those while are great are just pushing the tech in tiny increments. It's still the same tech. Kinda like how ICE vehicles got better and better, but they still use non-renewable energy.

This tech we need, is the leap from ICE to electric vehicles...vs an old model T to a modern Corolla.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

An order of magnitude more power in the same form factor in 30 years isn't a tiny increment. It was certainly a number of tiny increments to get there. And for those big leaps you're so desperately looking for, it isn't one little group sitting down together thinking how they're going to do something. There are decades of research building out a number of tiny discoveries, combined by a group at an opportune time to put it all together so everyone can talk about this momentous leap that they, from the outside perceived as something new that sprung out of nothing.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Yea that again, doesn't negate what I've stated. Tiny increments throughout a technologies life is great, just like ICE vehicles, but it's tech from the 70s and we need the next leap forward.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca 1 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Fusion power is based on the aeolipile and work by Marie Curie. Just because you don't see the all the incremental steps connecting those devices doesn't mean they aren't there.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 2 points 22 minutes ago

That's like saying the wheel was invented thousands of years ago...you know what I'm talking about and are just being pedantic about it.

[–] silasmariner@programming.dev 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Fusion power ain't there yet though, bad example?

[–] GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

Fusion power isn't commercially practical. We could make a working fusion plant right now. It would suck and provide almost no power, but we could make one. And the difference between the one we can make today that barely works and isn't useful and one that would be useful will be some number of additional incremental steps between where we are today and when that would work. Which is exactly the point. And your attitude of, well we aren't using it today, so nothing has actually been done, is what I'm criticizing, so thanks for making the point even more obvious.