This is simply because of how batteries work. We're focusing on lithium ion batteries, the most common in computing at our current point in time, and these are simplifications and not electrical engineering down to the exactest detail.
They can only hold the max charge when brand new. As they are used (charged and discharged), literal physical wear is happening within the battery (really, series of battery cells, it is not one chunk that fails at once). The capacity for the ions to "stay" on the desired side of the anode-cathode pair diminishes over time.
This is why batteries are advertised as maintaining x amount (usually 80%) after x cycles (usually 500) and why a device having a good Battery Management System (BMS) can be as important as how many mAH units a battery is rated as having.
As to why a plugged in battery suffers the same fate? Physics is cruel. A charge cycle is just defined as using an amount equal to 100% of your battery. Nothing says it has to be all at once.
A plugged-in lithium-ion battery still undergoes wear because it experiences minor discharges and recharges, contributing to charge cycles. Heat from constant charging and chemical aging also degrade the battery over time, leading to shorter battery life when eventually used unplugged.
Pedals...Holy shit, yes, foot buttons. Wow. This is not sarcasm, I forgot pedals are just foot input, not limited to a specific purpose like music making or whatever. I don't need more hand buttons I need pedals.
Yeah caffeine is a siren song for a select few. It's not necessarily an 'everyone and every form of ADHD thing', but it seems to present together often enough.
In my case it's tricksy because the line between "this much coffee will help sleep" and "this much coffee will make you feel like it re-activated the magic conversion machine the actual ADHD meds just shut down" is about 1 oz one way or another from a 5oz cup (a real small amount in sane units, I didn't convert).
Hard to not be a cynic and assume the ADA (American Dental Association) isn't wholly made up of "the 10th dentist" lobbying against dental progress but...
That is not the only dental care breakthrough that isn't widely available in the US (they're all available and priced for the 'I don't actually need to worry about price tags' crowd, who can also just travel elsewhere) but which would promote healthier lives at the cost of less dentist visits. Curious how it happens.
It’s not a complex ideology, but it’s an easy panacea - like conspiracies- for the hard reality that is modern existence.
Damn but that's some high grade poignancy early in the morning.
But it isn't a panacea. They're just told by the hate oil salesman it is, but they'll choke on it same as they would have with snake oil, just taking the rest of progress with them. There has to be a way to hijack the methodology and change the message.
Sometimes, others share their opinions and lived-in experience not to give you insight, but because to speak is to human. Sonder on that, whatever your generation.
I am aware the oldest writing is of a merchant swindling. I am aware of the atrocities respected elders have carried out against the Village children, all villages.
I am not here to insight you; use your own faculties for that.
It sounds like what it is, Flying. Not a tasty pill to swallow but these are the dues of the division modern society has allowed.
No more Village raising the children. No more respected elders, trusted craft people, or neighborly bonds.
For the illusion of connection and its subsequent gamification and for the enrichment of those who say what we want to hear, these are the dues to be paid.
We live and die alone, bemoaning a loss of bonds that could be mended at any time; let he who is lonely lay their cynicism down first.
No, I don't believe it's that easy (and recognize the risks of being first) but it probably is that simple. No clue how the message is amplified back through time in a manner that gets enough likes though.
If you can trust the human monkeys with the "shaping" of a rock that got us here, how you gonna distrust the widdle trivial matter of taking little bits of something and splitting them.
It's shaped charges, it's totally fine and sane. I'd happily get on the 1,000th Orion flight*.
This. Nowhere is the paradox of tolerance more dangerous than around "ableism" issues; people gotta learn to keep their targets sighted on the actual scum Insidiously using empathy to cross purposes.
The rightfully tolerant protector of the less able does not argue against the Nazi arguing he should be able to punch people without repercussions, they punch the Nazi until he shuts up and go back to equity for everyone else with a clean conscience.
Don't tolerate the intolerant; don't shield them with the benefit of the doubt or stop those with the conviction to stand up for those being told to sit either.
Of course not. Why would I risk limiting our market share that way?
I demonstrate synergy and the ability to run an agile ship by instead outsourcing development of an app charging 1,000,000,000 people $15 monthly for the privilege of pressing the button and posting that they weren't it this month.
Then I press it, because we must make sure our actions align with increasing shareholder value.
But only "pretty good"! Which sounds neat but that is just one step above "foundational" and good luck getting to mastery after skipping that, and finding the whole proposition a bunch of bullshit and really pretty good is enough, let's do the next thing and the next until we lose a few more forgotten "pretty goods" for lack of practice!
Shhh, you'll attract the solarpunks and then we'll really be finding out all about the ways of low-tech and high-nature. Some of us have things to do today other than design low-watt high-flow irrigation.
The irritation, however, stays in the collective gripe-o-meter section of public consciousness because of the many ways news outlets can shape public opinion in other ways (and often do) but sure seem to bend over backwards for a certain class of criminal, more often than they sure as fuck ought to, I opine.
You can maintain someone's presumption of innocence via non-libelous writing and still make it clear that editorial considers them a poorly regulated threat to a cohesive and social contact abiding society
(or whatever it is editorial is saying and no, there never was and never has been true unbiased news; a good outlet merely attempts to expose multiple views, but humans in the editorial process can't help but introduce slant towards one of those views however small.)
The wealth of nuance in my previous statement, for example, allows for both of these following interpretations to be attributed within a statement exposing the facts that allegedly tie Mr. Palmer, 49, of OK with the alleged criminal findings (while still avoiding a tort and leaving further reinforcing of the narrative possible through the rest of the hypothetical article) if the article writer is crafty and has a purpose:
'Mr. Palmer from OK, 49, is an example of why, you, similar dear reader, need to please consider revisiting your stance maybe, it's not okay to make pipe bombs to fight the unbelievers'
and
'Mr. Palmer from OK, 49, is a demented lunatic in layman's terms, and an example of why, you, similar dear reader (if you actually exist, please don't), need to chill the fuck out before taking a nap and drinking a juice box because you're a fucking child who is allowed to buy whatever you want from the hardware store, so show responsibility'
Or damn near anything else in-between. While still (the subject is our news outlet shaped strawman standing in for The Media, recall) allegedly not shaping the course of public discourse in ways that best aligns with the totally not commands and orders to not interfere with the owner(s) of the organization or their interests.
Words have power. Their selection matters.
The organizations whose existence is predicated upon this know this (the many humans within went to 'word' school as a rule). The politicians who are ever either condemning or praise the press know this. The billionaire owners of the media conglomerates know this.
They have a responsibility no matter how deeply a court of law can find them to be disingenuous, lying, cowards. Allegedly.
Take it easy on the uneducated y'all. The fact that the failure to get anywhere and still keep meeting is the whole point, is actually not as well known as it ought to be.
Ask yourself dear reader, if world governments didn't have a place to meet and waste time arguing over geopolitics and agreeing to disagree, how would such disagreements take place?
Theoretically, there are less big regional wars and no world wars anymore thanks to the UN's founding as the world government's pressure release valve.
I'll not share my personal stance on the matter, easy to discern as it may be.
Now, these days are the real test of the institution. It was intended to head off another of what's brewing (WW), to be a release vent and that's just fucking laughably not happening as genocide and fascism returns anyways.
So the institution and it's non-currently disingenuous members (US politics has been financially tied to Zionism too long for a clean break) need to call out the bullshit and the other four need to find their balls too because the only winner in a WW3 will be the US elite and rich, again.
Every other oligarch and oligarch wannabe is dreaming if they think our dragons will align with theirs out of dragonhood if Uncle Sam gets geared for global war again; the US will load it's cannons with its fodder stock of idiots and no-other-choicers and will once again do their outmost to take whatever path leads to the most rubble elsewhere and the most firesales on cheap foreign bonds. Just like before.
I see this happen to you a lot; don't forget the safest place to make and attack straw-men is usually the place with the least valid targets. You're a perpetual victim of missed nuance and that is the cost of discourse nowadays. I'd say don't let the bastards grind you down but there's not even that many here just people assuming you're the bastard.
This is simply because of how batteries work. We're focusing on lithium ion batteries, the most common in computing at our current point in time, and these are simplifications and not electrical engineering down to the exactest detail.
They can only hold the max charge when brand new. As they are used (charged and discharged), literal physical wear is happening within the battery (really, series of battery cells, it is not one chunk that fails at once). The capacity for the ions to "stay" on the desired side of the anode-cathode pair diminishes over time.
This is why batteries are advertised as maintaining x amount (usually 80%) after x cycles (usually 500) and why a device having a good Battery Management System (BMS) can be as important as how many mAH units a battery is rated as having.
As to why a plugged in battery suffers the same fate? Physics is cruel. A charge cycle is just defined as using an amount equal to 100% of your battery. Nothing says it has to be all at once.
A plugged-in lithium-ion battery still undergoes wear because it experiences minor discharges and recharges, contributing to charge cycles. Heat from constant charging and chemical aging also degrade the battery over time, leading to shorter battery life when eventually used unplugged.