Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
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.
I know what the article, with its many grandiose hypotheticals, says.
The problem with believing the article is that there's no evidence for it, and the numbers are obviously manipulated to prop up the Chinese team and denigrate all of the other people who already developed this technology.
There are no hard numbers, just vague superlative statements, no timeline of development, no acknowledgment of the other 50 companies that are already developing viable solid state batteries.
It's another silly statistically skewed China technology articles that doesn't bear any weight in the scientific world.
Could they blah blah blah? Yes they could blah blah blah. That's not exactly a newsworthy sentiment though.
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.
The headline is based on false numbers.
The article ignores existing solid state battery technology, and only talks about this "discovery," glamorizing it by use of said imaginary numbers.
This is not a hoax. This is simply an unsubstantiated, obviously biased blurb about an inconsequential experiment, that has strangely been posted to a community related to world news.
Using false numbers and ignoring the scientific context of any developmental technology is scientifically a responsible and certainly not world news.
The article is not boilerplate since it is deliberately misleading with its data and its statements.
Even if it were boilerplate, do you want to support propagandizing a single country's boilerplate articles among relevant world news?
That's what Yogi(op) is doing.