May I say conspiranoid and even more crazy than usual if I think about the following?
Yes, you sound like a 'conspiranoid'. This is why I've been keeping out of this whole thing.
What it shouldn't be: a witch-hunt against Batteroo, with people leaping on every new statement, tearing it apart, looking for the tiniest apparent inconsistency (even when there isn't one) and crying victory. It makes you look petty, like you have some agenda that you haven't declared, and (when you see supposed failings that have other explanations) like you don't know what you're talking about.
I must confess I do have a specific agenda. I do not like to see reputable EE/VC get away with a scam.
Yes, I agree. I try to avoid that thinking and question myself certain ideas, shifting to the kickball side and real data. I often do personal introspection about my thinking was, beliefs and knowledge. But never if enough.
Thanks for checking my wrong thinking, it's really appreciated. I really miss it from loved people that I see or contact them daily or very often and help them very often too, but they prefer to be polite instead.
But I already see technical careers are often very underestimated in the mainstream world. Tons of people see us as weird people that must solve their "important" problems, and do it fast. It doesn't matter if it's a family member, your boyfriend girlfriend, a friend or your narcissistic boss.
People underestimate our skills, efforts and problems. We are often seen as one if those tools they have no damn clue to understand our repair, something I dislike and fight against that defensively write often. I'm somewhat of a grumpy geeky guy.
That's not enough. Average people are even more illiterate about technology than other topics, at least in my country. I understand not everyone want to be an engineer, but I consider stuff such as Ohm's Law a lot more useful for everyday than insanely detailed topics in geography and history.
This is a great opportunity to skilled scammers to theft money from too many of those unfortunately very ignorant people about technology and science basics.
This is a shame and a curse to all of us. I'm having a very hard time learning electronics due to very diverse reasons and would love to someday be at least something near an EE. This kind of shit makes things even worse.
I consider scammers in science field to be dangerous criminals a lot more than those persecuted "intellectual property" infringers, because they can involve health risks up to very dangerous legend and can damage the reputation of professionals to get their jobs
What it shouldn't be: a witch-hunt against Batteroo, with people leaping on every new statement, tearing it apart, looking for the tiniest apparent inconsistency (even when there isn't one) and crying victory. It makes you look petty, like you have some agenda that you haven't declared, and (when you see supposed failings that have other explanations) like you don't know what you're talking about.
What it should be: taking testable claims, and testing them. That's what Dave has been doing, and that's what whoever it is doing the GPS tests is doing.
I agree.
There are plenty of testable claims, either via actual physical test, or via inspection and whiteboard and datasheet analysis using industry standard procedures and figures.
The GPS one is now thoroughly busted, although other people to confirm will add even more weight.
Want to verify the big thing in their latest "technical" video about power drops causing products to drop out? Simple - take a dozen random products and hook a datalogging multimeter on the battery terminals. Operate device until dead and get the plot.
See if:
a) There are any spikes at all
and
b) If there are, do they cause any problem?
Want to make that test quicker and easier?, that's easy, just discharge some batteries so only 10-20% energy remains (so it's worst case spikes due to high ESR) and capture the battery voltage on a scope. Maybe a few hours work for half a dozen products.
Claim either confirmed, or busted for half a dozen or a dozen typical products.
A few people do that and you have a lot of product data points.
I agree hard scientific data is the most important thing here. And not only because authentic testing and EE knowledge is the most solid reason, but because this has a very important didactic value.
But I think it's important to know the legal and institutional sides of this:
- What do UL think about this and if that testing is real? Are they reliable as a testing organization? Do they really care about their reputation in a professional and strict way?
- What about professional background? What were their real times at companies such as Micron?
- What's the reputation of that university? Are there some background about them?