Betteridge's law of headlines: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."
„Is drinking Paint thinner really as bad as everybody says?“
Corollary:
How not following trends and drinking paint thinner boosted my B2B sales
Well. It could be worse than what everybody says
is the poupe deck really what i think it is
Maybe it can be modified to something like:
"Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by yes or no, whichever seems the most obvious."
Nope:
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no." It is based on the assumption that if the publishers were confident that the answer was yes, they would have presented it as an assertion; by presenting it as a question, they are not accountable for whether it is correct or not.
"And with that, hopefully we can put this argument to rest."
That's not how the internet works, but nice try though ;-)
I disagree!
You fool! You fell into the classic blunder! All this time it was I, Dio!
It's as if engineers knew what they're doing.
If engineers were the ones in control that would mean something.
As I see it, phone manufacturers have zero reasons to keep the battery degradation low, but many reasons to push advertised capacity and charging speed. If you were cynical, you could also assume that they're trying to make sure the battery doesn't last too long because they want to keep selling new phones.
I think we all know that if an engineer went to upper management and said “I can charge these batteries faster, but it degrades the battery life by 20% over a year.” they would have said “Do it! We won’t mention that last part.”
Granted, with all the planned obsolescence happening, you could also argue that engineers "knew" what they were doing.
TL;DW: No
Ok, before i watch the video, no damage is not what great scott found from his testings.. ( https://youtu.be/iMn2yVoEqPs ).
so i have no idea what to believe anymore, but my (based) experience is that it does damage it. Ill have to watch later.
Yea, but that wasn't a great rest. I love Great Scott, but a lot of comments fairly call out his conclusion.
Most (all?)phones don't charge at full speed to 100% charge, they fast charge when the battery is almoast empty, and charge slower the more full it gets.
Right, so basically he removed the software aspect in his tests which removes systems to protect the battery. I assume without them, it is damaging, like what great scott found.
Ye, he should have continued his experiments then!
Those circuits he made up doesn't take into account that the phones have built in protections that alternate the input based on charge level.
I hadn't watched the video yet, but my phone's going the opposite way. It run slow charge overnight when it feels like it's going to be enough for it to be fully charged the next morning.
We really should let electronics and tight software take care of these little things.
However the Battery Saver mode on Androids that only charges the battery up to 80% DOES extend battery life. Substantial evidence shows that a high State of Charge accelerates degradation through: solid electrolyte interphase growth, loss of lithium inventory, and loss of active materials. (See: mdpi.com)
I love when YT amateurs act as if they are able to produce proper studies that are relevant in any fucking way
Non-magnetically-aligned wireless chargers are far worse than fast charging.
Wireless charging is a gimmick like 3D TV was. There's only one use case, and it's car use. But it doesn't need to be fast. In every other case it's worse than cable in every aspect
Wireless charging sucks. It costs significantly more energy to charge the same battery to full.
Your phone doesn't have that much energy stored in it. 5 watt hours or so? Now consider the energy cost of making usb-c cords
The charging pad itself probably requires a USB-C cable itself? It takes much more materials to make them than a cable...
It doesn't have plugging and unplugging cycles and doesn't get bent in different directions, so it will basically never break unless you use the phone while holding the charging pad
[citation needed]
https://www.ifixit.com/News/94409/wireless-charging-trading-efficiency-for-convenience
It's true, but wireless charging is still inefficient and should be avoided.
It's literally a few watt hours. Not kilowatt hours, watt hours. I pay $0.08 per kwh, so after a few years of wireless charging I might pay $1 more
But the USB-C cord might break in less than that time and cost more. Manufacturing cords is never going to be green, but electricity can be made renewable
The charging pad might also break and they require cables themselves, plus all the materials to make the charging pad, plus every phone has to support wireless, which is even more materials. I've never broken a USB-C cable, that's a user issue, you are either being way too aggressive with them, buying low quality ones, or both.
You keep on connecting and reconnecting the USB-C cable, and if you use it while charging you probably bend it.
The cable in the charging pad never gets unplugged
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
