☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml to Technology@lemmy.mlEnglish · 2 years agoresearchers at the University of Science and Technology of China developed all-solid-state batteries that match cutting-edge performance at just 4 per cent of the cost.www.scmp.comexternal-linkmessage-square28fedilinkarrow-up158arrow-down115
arrow-up143arrow-down1external-linkresearchers at the University of Science and Technology of China developed all-solid-state batteries that match cutting-edge performance at just 4 per cent of the cost.www.scmp.com☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml to Technology@lemmy.mlEnglish · 2 years agomessage-square28fedilink
minus-square☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up12arrow-down4·2 years agoLiterally the first paragraph of the article explains that it is 4% of the cost: Chinese scientists say they have developed a new solid-state battery technology to match cutting-edge performance at just 4 per cent of the cost. You seem to be confusing the cost of materials with the overall cost of production.
minus-squareBreakDecks@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6arrow-down1·2 years agoNone of these criticisms are rational. This response to an otherwise boilerplate news article speaks to an extreme anti-China bias. Just because you feel threatened by Chinese technological developments doesn’t warrant baselessly acting as though they are hoaxes.
minus-squareVaryk@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down3·edit-22 years agoRemoved by mod
minus-squareyA3xAKQMbq@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·2 years agoAnd 7/200 is 3.5%, maybe you should read that article again…
minus-squareyA3xAKQMbq@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2 years agoWhat does anything of that have to do with you quoting 50/200 as 25% not 4% 😂
minus-squareyA3xAKQMbq@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2 years agoSo you thought you’d add your own inaccurate numbers, okay. Stay out of my inbox now, thx.
minus-squareTheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8arrow-down4·edit-211 months agoRemoved by mod
Removed by mod
Literally the first paragraph of the article explains that it is 4% of the cost:
You seem to be confusing the cost of materials with the overall cost of production.
Removed by mod
None of these criticisms are rational. This response to an otherwise boilerplate news article speaks to an extreme anti-China bias.
Just because you feel threatened by Chinese technological developments doesn’t warrant baselessly acting as though they are hoaxes.
Removed by mod
And 7/200 is 3.5%, maybe you should read that article again…
Removed by mod
What does anything of that have to do with you quoting 50/200 as 25% not 4% 😂
Removed by mod
So you thought you’d add your own inaccurate numbers, okay.
Stay out of my inbox now, thx.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod