• 0 Posts
  • 10 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • Pelicanen@sopuli.xyztoComic Strips@lemmy.worldLove cure
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    While some people identify possibly problematic themes with this, for me it was quite moving. My family in particular have always seen this version of me that I never saw, especially not when I was suffering from depression and only seeing myself as someone who didn’t deserve happiness, and once I started therapy it made it easier for me to start appreciating myself more. They saw the person it would take me a very long time to give myself permission to discover.

    This reminds me of that.


  • Depends on on what they’re trying to convince people of. I see a few options:

    1. They believe they are close to a breakthrough and just need a little bit more funding to get all the way there. I don’t see this as likely because then they wouldn’t have come out with such extraordinary claims straight out of the gate.

    2. They want to fool potential customers into buying their products. Also not likely for the same reason you said, no one is going to include a product into their production line without verifying things first.

    3. They want to fool investors into buying the company. This is what I think is going on, they want enough breadcrumbs so that people who want to come out ahead of the big players (CATL, QuantumScape, Solid Power) will let their fear of missing out outweigh their skepticism and go all-in, then just cash out before anyone realizes it was a bluff.


  • As someone in the industry, I unfortunately highly doubt that the battery is real, at least in the way that they say it is. Individually, all of the claimed specs are within the realm of possibility, but combining all of them in one cell that supposedly does not contain lithium and is cheap to produce? Extremely unlikely.

    What I suspect is that they have one or a few expensive laboratory-made cells that fulfill at least the performance claims so they can raise interest, but which are in no way possible to produce at a reasonable price point.






  • From what I can find, the Linux Mint website was breached once, in 2016, for a short duration and during that time the download link for the ISO referred to a site that was hosting a version that installed a backdoor.

    Meaning it was short in scope, the dev team reacted to it, handled it, and then were open and transparent about it, and it only affected people who downloaded the ISO at that exact span in time and also installed that version instead of replacing it when the announcement came.

    The harsh reality of IT security isn’t that it’s a question of if you get hacked, it’s a question of when, even for multi-billion dollar companies.