Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Deliver a Longer-Lasting Lithium-Oxygen Battery (technologyreview.com)

Packing more energy into batteries is the key to delivering electric cars with longer range, smartphones that can last days -- and cheaper electronic products all around. Lithium-oxygen batteries represent one of the more promising paths toward that end. From a report: They could boost energy density by an order of magnitude above conventional lithium-ion batteries -- in theory, at least. In a paper published this week in Science journal, researchers at the University of Waterloo identified ways of addressing some of the major hurdles to converting that potential into commercial reality.

A critical problem has been that as a lithium-oxygen battery discharges, oxygen is converted into superoxide and then lithium peroxide, reactive compounds that corrode the battery's components over time. That, in turn, limits its recharging ability -- and any real-world utility. To get around the problem, researchers switched from a carbon cathode to one made of nickel oxide and supported by a stainless steel mesh. They also used molten salt for the electrolyte -- the part of the battery that allows positively charged ions to move between the electrodes -- and raised the battery's operating temperature to 150C. Those steps made it possible to achieve about three times the number of charging cycles as earlier lithium-oxygen efforts. The researchers also managed to increase the energy per unit of mass by more than 50 percent.

82 comments

  1. Bonus feature! by Narcocide · · Score: 2

    You can now also heat your house with it while discharging!

    1. Re:Bonus feature! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes.. yet another so called revolutionary battery that we will never ever see in any kind of mass produced product... just like the 10 million other fantastic batteries that was supposed to have been invented over the years, since the arrival of the current NiMh and Lithion Ion batteries that everything has been using for AGES now..

  2. Have I seen this before? by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have this sneaking suspicious that news about battery improvements is a circle of different press releases, such that they re-publish the same article every five years or so before moving further around the circle.

    The whole stainless steel mesh thing sounds just familiar enough I'm pretty sure they gave the game away.

    Oh battery scientists, you are so clever! They are probably all laughing at us from a tropical shore, drinks in hand and diesel generators happily powering a boombox.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Have I seen this before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's probably the same island they hold their Global Warming Scientists convention at.

    2. Re:Have I seen this before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it's Trump's fantasy resort, "Mar the Bloggo" where armchair "scientists" like Kendall here blather their opinions about the latest new technologies online, as if important.

    3. Re:Have I seen this before? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      Don't think so, I'd definitely remember hearing about a battery with a higher operating temperature than an internal combustion engine!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    4. Re:Have I seen this before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh battery scientists, you are so clever! They are probably all laughing at us from a tropical shore, drinks in hand and diesel generators happily powering a boombox.

      I get your frustration with how the press handles scientific research findings, but don't you say the same thing about other scientists (a la climate change)? How, exactly, do you determine which fields of science are completely corrupted by vast left wing conspiracies? Do you have a scientific method you use for this determination?

  3. Improving energy density by an entire order... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    .... of magnitude would imply to me that it would also take ten times longer to charge.

    Existing EV's can be fast charged to nearly completely charged in about a half hour.... would that mean that even overnight charging would have to be "fast"?

    1. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If that's the cost of 10x the range people would gladly do it. If it makes you feel better you can "only" charge it for 8 hours and get a mere 8x the range. This is a good problem to have.

    2. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      That's fine, except that, as I said... this is "fast" charging, which requires special electrical infrastructure to even begin to support. It's not something that you can just get wired up in your home garage.

    3. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OR, you could make the battery 10x smaller with the same range (actually more range since vehicle weight would improve). Few people need a 2000-mile range, or we'd have commonly available ICE cars with 100 gallon tanks.

    4. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. Fuck it. This technology is shit.

    5. Re: Improving energy density by an entire order... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would also increase range by an order of magnitude. So, letâ(TM)s say range was 240 miles before, and that it would be 2400 miles with the increased battery capacity. At 70 mph it would take 34 hours to drive that far. True, if you have two people driving in shifts, you could run that down. For most trips a car is likely to make, you arenâ(TM)t going to empty the battery, so you wonâ(TM)t have to worry about completely filling the battery either.
      Admittedly, the longest driving trip possible on earth is 8726 miles, so if you want to drive that non-stop, youâ(TM)re out of luck. You will have to stop twice to charge up. However, when electric cars really take off, I expect to see rental trailers with charges batteries and/or generators to extend range become a thing. You would get one at the start of the trip, then stop at a depot to exchange it for a charged one along the way. For that matter, why stop at a depot, just have the trailer also be an autonomous vehicle. The new one comes to meet you, and the discharges one drives off to be charged again. If you want to get really ambitious, maybe the car doesnâ(TM)t even have to be stopped to switch them. The discharges one just detaches and the charged one drives up behind your car and hitches itself on.
      It just doesnâ(TM)t seem like thereâ(TM)s a good reason for battery capacity to be a fixed quantity on electric cars.

    6. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why would a car manufacturer keep a battery of the same size with 10x the density, knowing that charging that battery would be a problem?

      They could always just make a battery pack that gives X range, and keep the charging the same for the value of X, but with a much smaller pack (less mass)

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    7. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by bws111 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well yeah, if you want to charge from empty to full overnight you would have to fast charge. But that would not usually be the case, would it? If you have 10x the energy, thus 10x the range, you could go 2500 miles on a charge. Nobody is doing that daily. So slow charge to 10% the first night, use half of that charge during the day, after the next night you are at 15%. In 20 days you will be at 100%, then you just need to keep it 'topped up'.

    8. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Yes... another commenter posted this point earlier. I feel stupid for not realizing it. If the energy density per kg can really be increased by an order of magnitude then battery weight with the same amount of total energy could drop substantially, which would have the upshot of increasing the range of the vehicle because it has less mass to push around.

    9. Re: Improving energy density by an entire order... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yup - I'm not changing. My horse is working great.

    10. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Or alternate between several packs to extend life, and allow the user to charge up as needed. Recommend that the user keep it above 500 miles and below 1,000 miles, and change which packs are charged and which ones aren't. Periodically move charge around as needed to keep cells from getting too low.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    11. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or, thinking like a manufacturer, put 1/8th the amount of batteries in the vehicle.

    12. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by hey! · · Score: 2

      Not necessarily. Battery charging rate depends on a number of things, including limits on charging rate to maximize battery life.

      Tesla's supercharging stations use proprietary systems to deliver "up to" 120KWs to the car. At that rate it should completely charge a completely discharged 90 kWh battery in 45 minutes. But I don't think this happens, because to preserve the battery rate of energy deliver drops as you get closer to topped up. Given that's the case, shoving 90kWh of energy into a 180 kWh battery should be faster than shoving 90kWh into a 90kWh battery.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    13. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Model S goes for 300 miles on a charge. It can be fast charged in an hour or so.

      A Model S that did 3000 miles would not upset me if it needed 10 hours to fast charge!

    14. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      If it can fast charge to 50%, then you can get 150 miles per half hour charge up to 1500 miles, seems nice.

      I'm more interested in being able to do 600 miles in a reasonable at home 12 hour charge though.

      I'd be willing to bet they use 3 times the storage for 1/3 the battery size, and allow 50% for leveling/marking dead cells.

      This would allow for double the fast charge range.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    15. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      knowing that charging that battery would be a problem?

      Why is charging the battery a problem? You are talking about a function of time. Just because a person can only charge 1/10th of that amount over night doesn't mean they don't have benefits from the battery. After all, who actually drives 250 miles every day anyway.

    16. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How unAmerican, Americans need bigger battery, the most best biggest battery.

    17. Re:Improving energy density by an entire order... by Matheus · · Score: 1

      Sure if this is a commuter car. Those of us who travel distance on a regular basis need "typical" range with a "reasonable" recharge time.. Most manufacturers consider 300 miles "typical" then I can fill my gas tank in 15 minutes.. I would consider a longer amount of time reasonable but there's a limit.. probably a half hour and honestly that's longer than I'd like.

      Now if they can increase my range in the orders being discussed so I could go 1000 miles / charge or more then I'd tolerate a MUCH longer charge time (as I need my own recharge at that point)

  4. Molten Salt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My favorite in-pants thing!

    1. Re:Molten Salt! by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      My favorite in-pants thing!

      Right. Because hot-grits batteries are just not panning out the way we all hoped.

      [Why do I suddenly think of "Natalie Portman" and "discharge"? :-/]

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  5. Your phone lasts for days... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because with a 150C battery in it, you don't dare pick it up to use it.

    1. Re:Your phone lasts for days... by ClickOnThis · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because with a 150C battery in it, you don't dare pick it up to use it.

      Meh. That's Prior Art for Samsung.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  6. YAWN!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not going to waste my time thinking about this unless it's in a product that Amazon can deliver to me house in 2 days or less.

  7. Oh Come On by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's another basic science press release! A molten salt battery, Yet somehow it runs at 150C, so salt doesn't mean NaCl, which melts at 801 degrees centegrade. And it's corrosive and eats itself. OK, lead-acid batteries are too, but there's some significant technology to get past, and this is still just a research project. Also, I'm wondering what heating up the whole battery to 150 C to start your car will look like, and what sort of battery you will need to do that. Obviously not the same battery.

    Wake me up when I can buy one off the shelf, OK?

    1. Re:Oh Come On by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "Yet somehow it runs at 150C, so salt doesn't mean NaCl, which melts at 801 degrees centegrade."

      So it's the temperature that tipped you off that they weren't referring to table salt? You have quite an intellect, Bruce.

      Yet somehow it runs at 150C! What is this, a school for ants?!?

    2. Re:Oh Come On by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Also, I'm wondering what heating up the whole battery to 150 C to start your car will look like"

      Obviously never saw greasecars, which will regularly pre-heat their cooking oil fuel to about 120C to ensure good flow and proper combustion. (I own one.)

      And those kits are available all day, every day.

      You may have some tech chops, but you know nothing about transportation and the underlying tech within.

    3. Re:Oh Come On by DCFusor · · Score: 1

      Oxygen - not air. Lithium reacts with nitrogen too. As Bruce said - this is a "give me money" clickbait press release. Think of the issues of first having pure oxygen - and then solve the rest, heh. Li reacts with a lot of things, nitrogen, water, and carbon dioxide among them. The reason we use it in batteries is that it's the lightest strongly electro-positive element. Another way of saying "really reactive...".
      I see these BS science press releases near daily. If 1 millionth of them came true, we'd have solar panels with 5000% efficiency, batteries that would launch a settlement to the planets, all disease would be cured, and we'd live 300 years. After awhile, you learn not to pay too much attention, and/or learn enough to know that while they may not be out and out lying, they're doing politician-speak - making some BS sound good and leaving out all the unpleasant parts.
      And once you learn how to parse that, politics BS detection will make you more cynical...

      --
      Why guess when you can know? Measure!
    4. Re:Oh Come On by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      You won't be able to keep your smartphone in your pocket for long if it has a 150 C component inside of it. Where does all the energy to heat the battery come from?

    5. Re:Oh Come On by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Obviously never saw greasecars

      Sure I did. They were in that movie with Olivia Newton-John. :-)

      You mean like this. It uses both refined diesel fuel and unrefined cooking grease, with the diesel to run the car and make heat until the waste heat from the engine makes the cooking grease hot enough to get through fuel injectors, etc. Some filtering is necessary too.

      I also know the director of Freeway Philharmonic, which has a scene of poor orchestra musicians syphoning cooking oil to run their car, not necessarily with permission.

    6. Re:Oh Come On by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Unget updandered. The article is paywalled and no, I don't know offhand what the electrolyte would be. Not sure what you expected.

    7. Re:Oh Come On by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, I'm wondering what heating up the whole battery to 150 C to start your car will look like, and what sort of battery you will need to do that.

      That is an unsolvable problem.

      Damn!! this coffee I put in my thermos last night just burned my finger. WTH???

    8. Re:Oh Come On by russbutton · · Score: 2

      Obviously 150C means you're not going to see this in cell phones or cars, but it would certainly be suitable for a whole house battery storage system to complement a large solar array. It would also be appropriate in a major system storage site to manage the load from intermittent sources like wind and solar.

    9. Re:Oh Come On by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Yet somehow it runs at 150C, so salt doesn't mean NaCl, which melts at 801 degrees centegrade.

      This is surprising? Molten salt batteries are old tech and are capable of delivering very high power output due to the very high ionic mobility. And no one every meant molten sodium chloride by a molten salt battery. Ever.

      Wake me up when I can buy one off the shelf, OK?

      Wakey wakey!

      https://energyconnections.net....

      Looks like they're even in stock.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    10. Re:Oh Come On by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At 150C it would tear the thermos and rip your fingers off. Also, thermal isolation for 150C element inside the phone is very different from thermos.

  8. Holy hot battery ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and raised the battery's operating temperature to 150C

    So, what kind of applications are suited for a battery which runs that hot? No consumer device for sure.

    That's freakin' oven temperatures and you could boil water with it, so I can't figure out what practical applications there are for this.

    1. Re:Holy hot battery ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Siberian tractors?

    2. Re:Holy hot battery ... by ohieaux · · Score: 1

      Who would want to drive around in a car with some 150C block under the hood?

      --
      Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.
    3. Re:Holy hot battery ... by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming that's sarcasm, but just in case it's not -- internal combustion engines run about equally hot.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    4. Re:Holy hot battery ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dual-power vehicles, waste cooking oil (almost any diesel engine) + electric, could benefit from this in colder weather climates as it heats up the fuel tank and de-gels the fuel. Run on hot electric for a bit, switch over to fuel when it is warm enough. Downside: Stoners will be drooling near your tailpipe if you use waste cooking oil instead of actual biodiesel or diesel fuel.

  9. Results depend on source by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

    We've found that batteries made for the Chinese internal market frequently have a lower capacity than those made for the Korean and US markets. Has to do with how they're made. Be aware of this.

    That said, also be aware of the operating ranges and any physical defects.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  10. actual, real improvements yet ? by cats-paw · · Score: 2

    I know science is hard, but it's astounding how many "new and improved battery" stories that we see, and how few of them end up being useful.

    it would be really interesting to do some statistics and see how many of these things have actually resulted in improvements to batteries that you can actually buy.

    my guess is that he number is really low, maybe even 0.

    it's kind of a amazing.

    --
    Absolute statements are never true
    1. Re:actual, real improvements yet ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really is! There is one every so often and they never come to fruition.
      I think it goes like this:
      Did you see that last article about some new battery?
      Yeah, now we dont have to do the work, lets just wait for this one.
      Some time later the cycle repeats...

    2. Re:actual, real improvements yet ? by Gilgaron · · Score: 2

      Scientists come up with cool stuff, like molten salt batteries that operate at 150C; blame the engineers if they can't make it into anything useful!

    3. Re:actual, real improvements yet ? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      I know science is hard, but it's astounding how many "new and improved battery" stories that we see, and how few of them end up being useful.

      On the other hand have you seen hoe uch batteries have improved in the last 20 years? Compare your old Ni-Cd drill with a odern Li-Ion one, for example. No contest.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  11. Re:can I use it in my dildo.. apk by dunnomattic · · Score: 0

    ...you mean TOAST "it"?

    --
    ...when everything is a crime, everyone is a criminal.
  12. What glove material to use by SemperOSS · · Score: 1

    ... when you are not allowed to use asbestos for your glowing phone at 150C?

    --
    I don't need a signature to draw attention to myself.
    1. Re:What glove material to use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... when you are not allowed to use asbestos for your glowing phone at 150C?

      Lawyer skin. The problem is to achieve optimal heat resistance you need a lot of layers of lawyer skin.

      And, the lawyer needs to be alive when the skin is harvested, or it doesn't work as well. ;-)

      I kid, I kid ... for anyone considering flaying lawyers, you didn't hear any of this from me, and you should consult a lawyer before you decide to skin lawyers for heat shielding to confirm if you need a permit.

      Failing that, there's always Nomex like everyone else uses.

  13. 150 Degrees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that the battery Samsung deployed in the Note 7?

  14. FTA: 15 years away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Its always 10-15 years away...

  15. Salt melts at 150C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who knew.

  16. Doesn't necessarily change charging time. by mykepredko · · Score: 1

    Going by other lithium cells, batteries charging currents are generally a function of the capacity of the battery which means that fast charging time generally remains constant. So, if a battery has 10x the capacity of a base battery, the charging current will be on the order of 10x with the overall charging time being the same.

    Of course, the circuitry for handling 10x the current is going to be significantly different than the base battery.

    1. Re:Doesn't necessarily change charging time. by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      Providing 1,200 kW (ten Tesla superchargers) over any sort of human-manipulatable cable would likely be infeasible. You'd either have to use an insane voltage, requiring even thicker jackets to reduce the safety risk, or use an insane amperage, resulting in a conductor diameter measured in inches. And imagine each charge station drawing as much power as the entire supercharger does now. The existing electrical infrastructure probably can't provide that much power in most places.

      Realistically, if we got a 10x increase in storage, I would expect the car companies to divide the pack into sub-packs and charge them sequentially, resulting in a 10x increase in charge times (well, probably more like 6x to 8x, because you could probably start fast-charging the next group of cells long before the first group gets completely full). If we're lucky, they might provide one or two or more charge cords per car to offset some of the difference in some places, where the infrastructure permits.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:Doesn't necessarily change charging time. by Bengie · · Score: 1

      After a certain point, you're better off using some energy to cryogenically cool the cables.

    3. Re:Doesn't necessarily change charging time. by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Ceramic superconductors would likely shatter if you bend them like you would a charge cord. Also, they are way too heavy. I'm not sure about the old-style metallic superconductors, but even those are significantly less flexible than wire at normal temperatures, as I understand it. So either way, you're replacing one flexibility problem with another, I think.

      There are some experimental superconductors in development that might make what you're suggesting possible, but I doubt they are anywhere near being commercially feasible yet.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  17. Re:Superfaggot Kendall here knows nothing about th by Narcocide · · Score: 2

    No, I think he's actually right this time. Within the last few years I remember hearing separately about both the "lithium-oxygen" thing and the "[something unexpected] mesh cathode" thing. Long enough ago in both cases that it's suspicious this is being reported on again as though it's brand new now. Who knows though, maybe they did really have another breakthrough in feasibility? I didn't read the article.

  18. No Thanks by Doc+Right · · Score: 0

    See, the problem with lithium oxide batteries is they explode when damaged. This happens when you overcharge, overdischarge, or physically damage the cell. Packing more energy into them is only going to make things worse. I'll stick with Lithium Iron Phosphate, thanks.

  19. Big Bang Effect. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Packing more energy into batteries is the key to delivering electric cars with longer range

    There's another word for this goal. Making a bomb.

  20. I'll hold my breath by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't wait for this "commercially viable" product! I'll just keep my molten salt battery heated with my free energy, and not worry at all about the fact that more power equals a bigger explosion when it all goes to tell.

  21. Scientists deliver ... by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    Wake me when the title says:

      delivers ...

  22. Cat got his tongue is why, lol... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & 2 questions he won't answer: 1.) Do hosts stop threats served by hostname (the way threats are done most) by blocking them? Yes. 2.) Do hosts speed you up 2 ways in adblocking (preventing more infection/tracking/slowdown) & via hardcoded favorite sites resolving faster + protecting vs. dns down or redirect poisoned? Yes.

    My hosts program's the only 1 that does the latter @ TOP of hosts cached in RAM (for best performance) & only 1 of its kind on Linux/BSD in easy to use flexible configuration GUI form.

    (I also did the latter LONG before the Chinese & 1st http://theregister.co.uk/2017/... )

    APK

    P.S.-> Has he done work that is that effective doing far more for far less faster in kernelmode speed/cpu priority w/ less complexity + excess overheads & for exploit vs. solutions KNOWN to be security-issue riddled (addons (souled-out to NOT work by default OR easily detected & blocked that are BYPASSABLE & EXPLOITABLE), DNS & Antivirus)? No... apk

  23. "Theoretically"?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wrong. Too bad /. editors don't understand the difference between theoretical, ideal, and/or model predictions. Too bad they don't understand the difference between an improvement (or proof of principle of a potential improvement) in a component of a complex system and an improvement in the complete system. I wonder how much radioactive waste would be needed to maintain the battery temperature at 150C? We may have solved our NIMBY problems for nuclear energy waste disposal!!

  24. Answer 2 simple questions... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & 2 questions he won't answer: 1.) Do hosts stop threats served by hostname (the way threats are done most) by blocking them? Yes. 2.) Do hosts speed you up 2 ways in adblocking (preventing more infection/tracking/slowdown) & via hardcoded favorite sites resolving faster + protecting vs. dns down or redirect poisoned? Yes.

    My hosts program's the only 1 that does the latter @ TOP of hosts cached in RAM (for best performance) & only 1 of its kind on Linux/BSD in easy to use flexible configuration GUI form.

    (I also did that latter part LONG before the Chinese & 1st http://theregister.co.uk/2017/... )

    APK

    P.S.-> Have you done work that's that effective doing more for less faster in kernelmode speed (cpu priority) w/ less complexity for exploit + excess overheads vs. solutions KNOWN to be security-issue riddled (like addons (souled-out to NOT work by default OR easily detected & blocked that are BYPASSABLE & EXPLOITABLE), DNS & Antivirus)? No... apk

  25. Re:Bogus feature! by thomst · · Score: 1

    Narcocide observed:

    You can now also heat your house with it while discharging!

    If your house is a materials lab, that is.

    The headline is (surprise!) profoundly - and purposefully - misleading. These researchers delivered nothing more than a benchtop demonstration. In other words, a glorified science fair project.

    Perhaps it's just me, but to use the word "deliver" accurately to describe what these folks have built, it would have to be, at a minimum, a working commercial prototype, designed for mass manufacture. The demo here is a long damned way from that ...

    --
    Check out my novel.
  26. Check Superfag Kendall's comment history, anti-sci by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kendall seriously has a psychological fear and loathing of science and all scientists, read his previous comments. He's a queen troll.

  27. Answer 2 simple questions... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & 2 questions he won't answer: 1.) Do hosts stop threats served by hostname (the way threats are done most) by blocking them? Yes. 2.) Do hosts speed you up 2 ways in adblocking (preventing more infection/tracking/slowdown) & via hardcoded favorite sites resolving faster + protecting vs. dns down or redirect poisoned? Yes.

    My hosts program's the only 1 that does the latter @ TOP of hosts cached in RAM (for best performance) & only 1 of its kind on Linux/BSD in easy to use flexible configuration GUI form.

    (I also did that latter part LONG before the Chinese & 1st http://theregister.co.uk/2017/... )

    APK

    P.S.-> Have you done work that's that effective doing more for less faster in kernelmode speed (cpu priority) w/ less complexity for exploit + excess overheads vs. solutions KNOWN to be security-issue riddled (like addons (souled-out to NOT work by default OR easily detected & blocked that are BYPASSABLE & EXPLOITABLE), DNS & Antivirus)? No... apk

  28. They didn't deliver anything? by fygment · · Score: 1

    Can't read the paper and the abstract is ambiguous so it seems like the paper is about a 'way ahead' as opposed to an actual device prototype. It seemed like the paper + article were a way to profile the research in order to get funding to actually build something ... a long long way (as one of the researchers says herself) from actually having a product or even it seems an experimental prototype.

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.