Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

There is absolutely no need for batteries to provide for storage, so that is a misleading assertion.


sort by: page size:

It is dishonest to pretend batteries are the only viable storage method.

There is no practical impact on modern batteries from being constantly connected to power.

I hope you aren't making the assumption that storage = batteries, then arguing because weeks and months of batteries would be needed, it's impossibly expensive.

This has literally has nothing to do with batteries.

Storage requirements are workload dependent. If your load can be deferred, you don’t need batteries.

A battery is very literally power storage. That's its only purpose.

No one is using batteries at a large scale at this point.

Ah. I wasn't thinking of batteries.

"Batteries" is not an energy source.

There is virtually no batteries without ICs, and, that has nothing to do with whether the device runs without a battery. That’s just a design choice.

Well, they don't need to be rechargable...

It doesn't mention why this, and not actual batteries.

Mentioning batteries can only distract from sensible discussion, because only the tiniest fraction of utility-scale storage will ever be batteries.

Ah yeah, the current cards do not have batteries.

Batteries are not feasible economically or capacity wise.

You don't use batteries to cover that worst-case scenario.

Ahh, yes. That makes sense. No batteries included.

Well they don't eat batteries, it seems. I know, doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.

Annalists have been saying this for years. I'm skeptical. Along many other reasons, there aren't enough batteries to go around.
next

Legal | privacy