• Lem Jukes@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    What with the weird freebooting article? This ‘article’ is just a description of Alec’s video with the clickbait cranked up to ten. Gotta love a major corporation using small creators’ work for free ad revenue…

    • lemmyingly@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      And Alec’s video is mostly a freeboot off someone’s article.

      So this is a full on article and YouTube circle jerk.

        • lemmyingly@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          You clearly haven’t looked at either article. Parasocial relationships are weird.

      • Lem Jukes@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        You know there’s a difference between using sources and just regurgitating a summary of something with AI right?

            • lemmyingly@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I guess you’re right because I didn’t properly look at the hackaday article.

              Alec has paraphrased the Tedium article. All of the talking points of Alec’s video is in the article.

              The hackaday article just summarised the 16 minute video into 4 short paragraphs and linked to Alec’s video.

              Edit: I like interactions like this (the comment thread since my first comment) because it highlights how easy it is for people to make judgements based on a lack of knowledge. It reminds me to try to not make assumptions.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m fairly sure that the image is even a screenshot from the video. Uncredited I notice.

      • toynbee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        It is, I just watched the video an hour or so ago.

        edit: In fact, until I read this thread, I didn’t notice the URL and thought this was a link to the video.

      • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Does someone have a content description so I can read instead of having to watch it?

        Oh wait, here’s an article, nevermind.

        • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          For anyone that couldn’t bother reading the above comment, I’ve given a summary…

          hurrrrr I’m incapable of engaging the point people are making.

          • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            No, it’s about me not being able to arbitrarily sit down and watch a video due to various issues like attention span, hearing issues*, limited mobile data and being at work, where an article or summary is much easier and faster to read and can be interrupted at a moment’s notice unlike a video which I’ll have to pause, scrub back through if I missed a detail and wait for it to get to the right point, and I can more easily search for stuff.

            My point is that there seems to be a habit of dismissing the value of textual summaries in favour of “just watch the video” in much of the online world, where I’ll be looking for a quick explanation and get presented with some video instead. Some people don’t do so well with videos so it’s not “just” watching the video.

            There are advantages to text that I hate seeing people ignore.

            (Besides, how would you know I’m incapable rather than just unwilling; or why would you assume either in the first place instead of considering inability?)


            * That issue applies to voice messages and phone calls too. While videos occasionally have good CC, I haven’t found them to be reliable or ubiquitous enough. Additionally, they present the speech in fragments and usually are just as hard to search through. Either way, videos are a “sometimes” thing for me.

          • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            And a good day to you too. Not sure why you felt the need to be insulting, but anyway.

            A transcript of the video

            Would you happen to have one handy? Or are these autogenerated these days. Are they better than the autogenerated CCs?

            Also there’s a source listed in the description, guess what it is? An article.

            Yeah, which would require me to click on YT in the first place, which is already what I want to avoid due to a limited mobile data plan and YT being a wonderful drain on that.

            I’m just trying to push the point that “just watch the original video instead” isn’t as great a solution for everyone as some people make it out to be.

            • Lem Jukes@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Sorry I was trying to match the level of insulting tone of your reply, I guess I went too mean.

              Technology Connections actually has great CC and Transcripts as I believe Alec adds them directly after proofing an as aired script after his final edit. But I am only guessing based on the level of quality I’ve seen in both after years of watching his channel.

              Your point kind of falls apart though because the subject at interest here is not ‘battery testers’ it’s about a crappy ‘news’ site generating a two paragraph summary of a YouTube video and screencaping images from said video in order to generate ad revenue with minimal effort and dubious ethics.

              That freebooted content being from a longstanding creator of high quality, educational, video content. If you’re so interested in the subject and want to learn more about the subject why not look for one, or even just ask? Instead of trying to make some lame high horse comment in defense of some crappy ai text that only exists to mooch off of actual people’s work.

              Not to mention you didn’t even ask for a source you wanted a ‘content description’ which is like you came in here and went ‘I don’t want video, I want ai slop describing the video.’

              Also, you’re a dingus.

              • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                Sorry I was trying to match the level of insulting tone of your reply, I guess I went too mean.

                Eh, I’d be a hypocrite to point fingers for that. All good.

                Technology Connections actually has great CC and Transcripts as I believe Alec adds them directly after proofing an as aired script after his final edit.

                I don’t know this specific creator, or many YT tech creators really, since YT isn’t really my main haunt (I’ve tried to explaing that elsewhere, but it boils down to “I rarely have the mental ability to sit and watch them”) and I genuinely prefer articles.

                The video having good CC doesn’t solve most of my problems, unfortunately. It’s a good thing to have, don’t get me wrong, just doesn’t help me a whole lot.

                it’s about a crappy ‘news’ site generating a two paragraph summary of a YouTube video and screencaping images from said video in order to generate ad revenue with minimal effort and dubious ethics

                I’ll grant the dubious ethics point. That subtext didn’t parse for me. My focus was on the fact that the article, being a textual medium, is more useful to me.

                I’m mostly upset at the prevalence of video content and the tendency to push people away from text, like “This guy has a great video” is a useful response to “I’m looking for an article”. This topic set me off, but my frustration is independent of the specific context. I’ve had it happen often enough to make it a sore spot, but that isn’t strictly the original comment’s fault.

                If you’re so interested in the subject and want to learn more about the subject why not look for one, or even just ask?

                It’s not a deep interest so much as a passing “stumble across something interesting”, so I wouldn’t necessarily seek out content on the topic. But if I were offered an essily digestible format, I’d be curious enough to consume it.

                I agree that it would be better not to post cheap ripoffs, but they fill a market gap that I’m the audience for. The solution isn’t to complain about the moochers filling the gap, but to fill the gap yourself. I’m not defending sloppy AI text specifically, but the concept of converting content to a different medium.

                If the content creators don’t want to cater to those who prefer that other medium - perfectly fine, that’s their prerogative. But to then complain if someone else adapts your content to a medium you didn’t want to, that’s what rubs me the wrong way.

                Also, you’re a dingus.

                Fair enough. My phrasing was harsh and born of a frustration that I didn’t really convey.

              • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                In my experience, YT would still end up loading a section of the video along with previews of suggestion. Maybe that has changed.

            • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Dude they matched your tone if you thought that that was insulting that’s because your original comment was insulting

              How about you be less of a dick and people won’t respond to you in a way that you don’t like

      • Lem Jukes@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Doesn’t mean this is good content I think belongs here. The original video that links to a transcript and a source article do belong here. You want a description cause you don’t want to watch it? go feed the link into chat got. Or ask in the comments. I’m gonna call out corpo freebooting bullshit when I see it and it doesn’t belong on lemmy.

        Sorry, I’m pissy rn.

        • Landslide7648@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Sure, that’s a fair opinion. I just don’t share it. I wouldn’t have known about this video in the first place. Also I don’t care to use AI summaries.

          Coincidentally I was also a fan of the described functionality on batteries and I have used it gladly and without hurting myself. So that clearly makes me different from the vast majority of people here in the comments.

          I may have been just as happy with the original article the video is based on, who knows. But since that wasn’t shared here I preferred this one over the video.

    • pbbananaman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      This is how hackaday posts have been… for like a decade. I guess it’s somewhere between articles and link aggregator.

  • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    My dad used to just put them on his tongue for a power check. Not entirely sure how that worked. Personally I just use a multimeter.

  • Mwa@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Did the power check work or was it snakeoil I remember trying to see it while hurting my hand.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I really miss it honestly. Kids, so, so many batteries in my house.

        Dad, my blah blah blah isn’t working right. Then I have to go dig out this monster:

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Hopefully not because the kind of batteries that work with this reader are awful batteries. Single use disposable batteries are an absolutely stupid idea we should be moving away from

        • hOrni@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Why does it look so weird? I’m not even sure what shape I’m looking at.

          • linearchaos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Just an inch thick plastic box with a perspective drawing sticker on top of it, But the box is shaped to fit the perspective drawing.

          • Myro@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Haha yeah, it looks like a fake picture or some cartoon.

          • linearchaos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I have no lack of proper test equipment, this is actually kind of nice because the kids can use it easily without trying to wrangle a battery and two leads.

    • ilikecoffee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It did, see Technology Connections’ latest video on it, he explains fully how it worked. Quite clever tbh.

      • bss03@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Although, he admits in the video to “faking” his footage of it working, by using a off-camera heat source. (His batteries were quite dead.)

        But, as someone that lived through this time, they did work, as long as you pressed hard enough in the right places. It was hard to tell if the battery was dead or if you weren’t pressing hard enough

        • ilikecoffee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          If you watch the whole video he does it more “for real” later on, plugging the casing into a power source to simulate a battery discharging… Plus I’ve had some of these PowerCheck batteries, and they were not old, it was like… 2017? So maybe they rebooted it for a short time at some point?? Anywho, if you pressed really hard it did work I think, but also I think I was doing it wrong for a long time as well lol

  • criticon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    There were cheaper ones with a tester attached to the box, maybe they were energizer?

  • narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    He used old batteries, but I actually had new Duracell batteries with this feature very recently, in 2022 or so (Germany).

  • Asifall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I have a really distinct memory of finding a bunch of these in a friend’s house when I was a kid and every one was empty. After watching the TC video I think it’s more likely I just wasn’t pressing hard enough and had no way to know that. Anyway, I can see why they stopped making them.

  • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    If they are not rechargeable, they don’t make sense, you just use them and throw them in the used up recycle pile. And if they are rechargeable, you already have a charger that does it.

    • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It also has to be a waste of some resource that is rare to not use up and throw away like this.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      This I can get behind.

      I don’t need it on all my 18650s, but a few would be nice. Also 21700s.

      Someone bring this back.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The voltage-to-capacity radio for lithium is much less linear compared to alkaline so it wouldn’t really work well :(

  • Damage@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I was a kid then, but I remember that I had to push so hard my fingers hurt… I used a multimeter.

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      as a kid I would shove them up my nose not to be seen again until out they would pop from the other side…miraculously charged.

    • voxel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      you just had to put one of the other fingers on the battery groumd and not push that hard iirc

    • bandwidthcrisis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well the pros and cons of the multimeter are addresses in the video! He uses a meter on a dead battery and it still shows a deceptively reasonable voltage when not under load. The built-in tester draws more current.

      • YerbaYerba@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        My technique is to use the 10a mode on the multimeter and check the battery. A full AA will do nearly 10 amps and dead ones much less. Careful with larger cells or rechargeables since you might blow the fuse in your meter.

  • vxx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It turned out that batteries randomly lying around are always empty. Functioning batteries are still in the device it’s operating or in the box it was sold in.

  • irotsoma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It failed often enough that it wasn’t all that useful. A cheap battery tester is better. And for 9volts you can also use the tongue test, lol (don’t really though). My grandfather used to do that all the time.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The tongue test works great. Be warned, though, that a full battery will make your tongue go numb. It’ll feel like you have a big hole in the middle. Try it.

      • irotsoma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ouch, I never had that problem, but I only barely touch it, lol. It’s a little shock and slightly numb briefly. But fortunately I never had full numbness that lasted more than a second or two. But I haven’t done it in a long time since I have a tester now. 😁

    • v_krishna@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      What’s wrong with the tongue test for 9 volts? I know it tickles some but is it actually harmful? I’ve been doing that for over 30 years…

      • irotsoma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        It’s not much power, so it’s not likely to cause major or permanent damage, but it may affect others differently and could cause burns if left on too long like if someone is less sensitive and doesn’t think it’s live.

        And if the person is grounded and if they touch the hot side of the battery first there’s a chance the charge could travel through the body rather than just the tongue. It’s not enough to affect a heart, but might disrupt a pacemaker or other embedded device.

        And of the battery is leaking, it could cause permanent damage from chemical burns from the alkaline and poisoning from heavy metals which while unlikely to be deadly with just one battery, heavy metal poisoning is cumulative across a lifetime.

        So under ideal circumstances it is safe, but there are always risks with electricity and toxic chemicals, though relatively small.