AGW discussions always bring out the most boring trolls.

Nobody is racist for claiming that Chinese batteries, BMSes, or battery packs can be the culprits, unless they assert that the cause is genetic inferiority.

I was asking about the differences. Therefore everything you said in response to my comments in this subthread was irrelevant, which is kind of obvious.

Every sentence in my comment was relevant to the point I was making, which escaped you.

That is irrelevant to the point I was making, which is that some Spanish speakers are speaking much more rapidly than other Spanish speakers. You responded with an irrelevant comparison of Spanish to English.

The sentence you ignored was "Spanish speakers also don't all speak at the same rates." How can you possibly believe that to be irrelevant when the subject at hand is the speed at which information is conveyed? That's like thinking different network speeds are irrelevant to the time it takes to transfer a file.

Fuck all the way off. Then, once you have fucked all the way off, come back so I can tell you to fuck off again.

That's an interesting question. Most batteries in small devices are pouch cells, and when the pouch bursts they're no longer contained and air can reach their contents. On the other hand, air inside a plane is usually so dry that it can cause some people nosebleeds, so I don't know how big a factor that might be. Especially since I've done some [casual] experiments with swollen pouch cells and they seem to react to atmospheric moisture very slowly. A punctured pouch cell will continue to swell up for a very long period, I've got a small one outside that has been displaying additional swelling for months and months now.

Your reply shows you ignored the first sentence of my comment. No sentence in that comment was irrelevant to my point. If you like, you can take another stab at it.

You never learn. This story is about how their model turned out to be a really great guess and you're still in here with this bullshit.

That's just a subset of #1 that's aware of #2.

I have to read some stuff to people on a regular basis. If it's clearly the umpteenth time they've heard it then I read it quickly. If it seems to be the first time, I go much more slowly. If they're in a hurry then I read it very quickly. I know my diction is still good (and therefore the same amount of information is being conveyed) because I regularly receive compliments on how I am able to read it very rapidly and still be understood. I also invite them ahead of time to let me know if I'm going too fast, and nobody has done so yet.

You can definitely overclock your speech. Watch a drug commercial.

Spanish speakers also don't all speak at the same rates. It's commonly noted that Spaniards themselves speak more rapidly than most other Spanish speakers, and that most Mexicans do as well (but not usually as quickly as most Spanish people.) The summary of this study seems to ignore that. ;) (I haven't read the study yet.)

It's unclear why you chose to leap to the defense of battery fires, but I guess this is how Slashdot is now.

I think you've watched Hackers and/or ID4 too many times.

It will be able to land in most of the places where helicopters land. Of all of the helipads I've seen either in person or in photos, most of them have considerable space around them for reasons which should be obvious to this audience.

Traditional, typical helicopters also have some drawbacks that a craft like this does not, like a whirling single point of failure which is expensive to produce and requires exceptionally frequent inspection.

You can buy mass email software from a number of vendors and run it in your own servers. You can also do it with FOSS for the entire stack. No one is being forced to pay a subscription to spam. They have the option to do so for convenience.