Even though this is a recall, a bad thing, it actually makes me more likely to buy from Anker than a no-name brand on Amazon. Those no-name brands almost definitely have problems like this (or worse), but we rarely hear about them.
Eh. Anker did the bare minimum to address their liability.
They won’t pay for devices that Amazon says are in scope, but the black on black serial number is illegible.
For devices that are covered, they advise you to not dispose of them at a retailer like Home Depot that accepts lithium batteries, but provides no means to safely dispose of this fire hazard. So I got my $40 payment, but I assume now that will disclaim any liability when my house or car goes on fire while I try to find a facility that accepts dangerous batteries.
Honestly, when shopping no-name slop I'm seeking out products that don't have batteries, or at least don't have powerful ones (non-vibrating game controllers are probably pretty safe). One less risk.
I wish more devices took field-replaceable cylindrical Li-ion cells. They're pretty common in flashlights and rare in other products where they would be advantageous.
It would be awesome if we were able to get more things besides vapes (and apparently some flashlights; I assume there are many niches where they are common) to use 18650 or even 21700 li-ion cells. I see most people I know buy AAs by the pallet and go through them regularly for their controllers, led lights, kids toys, etc.. and few I believe bother to dispose of them correctly.
Also, repeating your sentiment, for all the tech gadgets.. bluetooth speakers, I'm looking at you.. why not have replaceable batteries for those? There have to be enough vapers now that the knowledge of this type of battery as distinct from the old alkaline ones has passed into mainstream consciousness. This would be a huge selling feature for me.
The reasons I see are that it is because the rechargable li-ion are more dangerous and a fire hazard, but is this really true? As with most anything that can carry a risk if misused, I can find a few dozen instances where a vape battery went awry, but surely the benefits outweigh the concerns?
Edit: I do understand the irony of saying this on a post about when they do go boom.
The market for the end product (and the risk aversion of the manufacturer) makes a difference.
Flashlight and vape enthusiasts are mostly adults who likely trend as all three of: older and more knowledgeable, more likely to take and accept risks, and more willing to pay a premium for the benefits of replaceable batteries... and the companies that make vapes and high-powered enthusiast flashlights are probably less worried about a customer suing them over a battery issue than a large toy manufacturer. If you're a vape company, you have bigger safety issues to worry about -- like the normal operation of your products :)
> and few I believe bother to dispose of them correctly.
There are no mercury alkalines anymore for general consumer use, those collection bins were removed from stores in the 90's and they can be disposed of with normal waste.
I actually have a Bluetooth speaker that takes a removable 18650. It was branded "Polaris V8", but I think it's a white label product that's no longer in production. It still works, and most other ten year old Bluetooth speakers probably don't.
I'm with you on the risk/benefit calculation. E-waste is bad, and the option to bring a spare battery makes a lot of products more useful. A Li-ion cell can be dangerous if mishandled, but less so than a jug of gasoline or larger power tools.
This can be considerably mitigated by sticking a protection circuit on the end of a cell, which makes it no more dangerous than the proprietary Li-ion batteries used in things like cameras.
I didn't know many were still buying alkaline AAs in large quantities. I've been using LSD NiMH AAs and AAAs for I think more than 15 years and haven't looked back. They seem to work with everything.
There's still lots of poorly produced electronics that treat NiMH that is within its normal operating voltage as being out of juice, and either nag you or shut down completely. My supposedly high quality Logitech mouse is one example (probably not buying anything from Logitech ever again, they're one of those brands that are coasting on their old credibility).
If it runs on two batteries in series and you're willing to take a risk, you can get a 3.7V 14500 battery and then a dumb fake straight wire battery in there. Gives you 1.85V per-slot instead of the normal 1.5, which might be too much for the device, but beats the pants out of the 1.2V you get from NiMH AAs.
I got 14500s for my Logitech F710 game controllers, and then drilled a hole in the battery compartment of the controller to make them plug-in chargeable. I've only just played with them a few times - no guarantee this is a long-term solution, but it seems to work well for now.
Note that this does mean you'll have a bin of things that look like AAs but might cause a fire or melt if you put them into the wrong thing that accepts AA batteries (like the just-a-wire-fake-batteries have allcaps warnings about never ever putting them into a charger).
It actually gives you 2.1V per slot because a fully charged standard Li-ion cell is 4.2V. This is also sketchy because it will likely over-discharge the cell below 2.5V if not monitored carefully. Over-discharge makes it dangerous to charge the cell again.
Actual protected 14500s will be too long in most devices meant for AA, but it's possible to find protected 14430 cells marked as "14500" from some flashlight brands like Acebeam and Skilhunt. Those are safe with regard to over-discharge, but the voltage of a fully charged cell might still damage devices not rated for it.
I'd rate this modification as risky and only suitable for people with significant battery expertise.
Edit: saw the other comment mentioning 14500s with USB ports. These will be protected against short circuit and over-discharge, and are actually based on 14430 cells.
Ah, thanks! Good to know I dodged that bullet by blind luck. I had picked up a couple of USB-port charged version of one of those old chubby non-rechargeable lithium batteries that were used in early LED flashlights (CR2 I think) to resurrect some old steel LED flashlights I found in a drawer, and got funny fantasies about doing other devices this way.
I saw some articles and ads for doing it using 3.1V LiFePO4 batteries but I couldn't find any of those with USB charge-ports... I guess your warnings are why you're supposed to use the 3.1V Li-phosphates for that. So I went with the 3.7V LiIon because I really wanted that port.
I guess I dodged a bullet. Thanks for the warning. I actually did systems engineering as an undergrad (though I just work in software) so that makes me a bit overconfident with electronics even though I don't know jack about battery chemistry besides the basic theory. I'll be more careful on research next time I undertake this kind of project.
It seems like you might be looking for "1.5V Li-ion AA", which is a 14430 with a buck converter stuck on the end.
I have pretty much the opposite preference regarding charging: I'd much rather swap in a charged spare and stick the drained battery in a slot charger than charge batteries inside devices. There's no waiting that way.
As an aside, pretty much all the g604 is will end up with double click reliability issues or an inability to hold down the mouse button and drag. But you can easily replace the switches or there's vendors on eBay and AliExpress that I'll sell you a circuit board with the switches pre-soldered for replacement.
A fun trick is that if you're sure the batteries are in series you can sometimes swap out a pair of AA batteries for a 3.7V 14500 Lithium rechargeable and a fake AA battery (just a wire in an AA-sized plastic shell). Drill a hole in the battery-cover of the device where the 14500's USB port is and now your device is plug-in rechargeable, assuming it can handle 3.7V instead of the normal ~3.1V that comes from a pair of AAs (which isn't a huge stretch). Worked for my old Logitech game controllers.
Downside is that you've got parts in your bin that are dangerous because they look like AA batteries but could cause damage or even fires if somebody put them into the wrong AA thing. Make sure to mark the batteries loudly. I've electrical-taped the pairs together to prevent this problem.
I have a headlamp for hiking with a slightly different take on this.
It will take 3x ordinary or rechargeable cells, or it will take it's Li-Ion pack that is the same size as the 3 cells side by side. Designed in from the start so there are no dangerous bits. Hiking headlamps are something where you do *not* want to be left with a dead battery!
A headlamp that can run on either AA or 14500 tends to be a better approach than this. Those proprietary batteries are usually pretty expensive compared to a 14500, and three AAAs as spares aren't nearly as convenient as one AA.
There are a handful of these on the market and they're not common in retail stores. I'm fond of the Skilhunt H150.
Follow up on this: from conversation elsewhere, another important safety tip is to get the 14500s with fancy electronics incl a USB port, because without that the battery will be a fire-hazard in this kind use.
That's true, but it's pretty common to stick a protection circuit on the end of a cell, making it similarly safe to the proprietary Li-ion batteries that power cameras and the like.
It's also common to not put protection on the end of an 18650, which is probably a big reason we don't see more of these in user-serviceable devices. Even if you ship a device with a protected cell, the inherent implication of an 18650 socket is that someone is going to buy a cell from somewhere else and stick it in there. (and maybe throw a few in their junk drawer along with some loose change and rusty silverware)
Perhaps one of the things that should be included in right to repair legislation is stronger liability protection in cases where a third-party battery is installed in a device.
I do often stick unprotected cells in flashlights that came with protected ones. It's important to know whether the flashlight can over-discharge the cell, but most can't, and it's important to not short-circuit them. I suggest people who don't want to learn about batteries stick with protected.
Eh... I strongly disagree... We shouldn't let companies put out products that burn parents' house down because grandma didn't research 18650 protection circuits when she bought the grandkids some batteries for their toy on Amazon.
Consumer product safety regulation is written in blood, and exists for a very good reason.
Let the advanced right-to-repair audience open up the device with a screwdriver and install a new LiPo pouch. We don't need a battery door to let kids in like it's as safe as AAs in a gameboy.
The screw on the battery door is typically a choking hazard mitigation. The idea being, if you know how to use a screwdriver, you are skilled enough to not eat the battery.
I think there’s still a big chasm between that level of skill and knowing there’s a difference between protected and unprotected 18650s… or even knowing what an 18650 is at all. Most people have never heard of them.
The right-to-repair “I know what I’m doing” crowd can disassemble the device as long as it isn’t glued shut.
Other mitigations are possible, such as a battery compartment designed for cells that are 69mm long, as is typical for protected cells instead of 65mm. I'll admit I complain about this when reviewing a flashlight (use longer springs so it's not picky), but it's likely the right choice for many applications.
It's not the right choice for all applications of course. Products intended for children and that are particularly demanding in terms of electrical power require greater caution than speakers or most flashlights.
> The batteries that come with the light are perfect, but all the panasonic 18650s I have purchased are about 1/8 (3mm) too short.
> I was thinking of using aluminum foil.
If people on enthusiast forums are struggling to put batteries in their devices safely, the mass market is doomed. Proper safety engineering is to design a device in a way where foreseeable misuse by a layperson does not result in a safety issue.
This isn't incompatible with a right to repair. Just simply don't glue the device shut. The LiPos used in many devices are common jelly-bean components.
I don't think it should be required that devices protect users from unsafe modifications even if they're foreseeable. I can also tape down the safety bar on the lawnmower, remove the guards from the circular saw, and take the firing pin block out of the gun. I'm sure people have done all of those things, and some have regretted it.
What I'm advocating is a bit beyond just repairability; field-replaceable batteries the ability to charge spares externally, and the ability to share spares between devices are substantial benefits.
You must have a charge controller in Li-Ion between each voltage point because overcharging a cell is asking for trouble.
Sealed battery pack, you can put a little controller in there with it. Loose cell, you either give up some capacity and add some cost by putting a controller in each cell, or you trust that the controller in whatever charges it is good. Bare cell, good charger, fine. Bare cell, iffy charger, you might get the blame when the cell goes up. Thus it's very hard to find good bare cells.
There's a flurry of battery holders that accept 21700 cells, but the power delivery is just too weak IMHO.
From memory, the max output was about 20~30W for the bigger models [0]. For 2 cell types it gives 10W, so barely good enough to slowly charge a smartphone.
LFP capacity is terrible. LMFC is a recent development which closes that gap; it's still heavier than NMC or NCA, but that's a worthwhile tradeoff in many applications.
Same, but different. I have bought maybe hundreds of rechargeable AA/AAA batteries over the last ten years, and chased as exclusively as possible devices without built-in rechargeable batteries.
Anything with a built-in battery is nearly always e-waste within 3 years, while I've had AA/AAA devices that are 5-10 years old that are fine.
Pop the batteries out when in storage, never need to wait for it to recharge (just rotate in new batteries), use disposable batteries from the corner shop in an emergency.
Exactly. I still use portable flash units (speed lights) that are now well over 20 years old, while a lot of the newer units have built-in batteries that will fail in just a few years. And it's an extreme example, but I still use my Game Boy DMG, which is a 36 year old device.
All electronic devices are eventually e-waste, but devices that use AA/AAA can last decades longer. I only buy something with a lithium ion battery when there is almost literally no alternative (essentially phone and laptop).
If they have flat batteries you could be safe if they are LiFePO which are quite hard to light on fire. YMMV depending on the actual battery. Usually the come from batches of old phones which went out of production are put into these kind of things since they can be bought on the cheap.
If they put in a round cell I'd stay away. I usually replace the cell with one I know is good and check the circuit for protection. Wouldn't be the first time I've seen something with no over or undervolt protection whatsoever.
No phones use this chemistry. I have no idea what you're on about.
>Wouldn't be the first time I've seen something with no over or undervolt protection whatsoever.
Even the cheapest lithium ion charge controllers have overvolt protection by the nature of how they work. What can happen however is a controller could be specced to charge to 4.3V per cell and a 4.2V cell is instead installed. This is a problem.
I am not sure that no-name batteries are that more dangerous. A common reason batteries catch fire is when things are too densely packed, causing shorts. A famous case is the Galaxy Note 7, which is Samsung, not Chinese tech.
No-name batteries are often way lower capacity than advertised, which means less stuff, and therefore less densely packed and less stuff to burn.
I am not saying that these batteries are safer, or that it is not a scam, but the fact that these batteries are lower capacity can compensate for the sketchy build. Power electronics is another story, so while the battery may be ok, the charging circuit may not.
> A common reason batteries catch fire is when things are too densely packed, causing shorts. A famous case is the Galaxy Note 7, which is Samsung, not Chinese tech.
Note 7 thing was a faulty velding line. And no x-ray quality checks.
That's mostly related to them being rather dumb across the connection to the charger, instead of having the charge controller integrated with the battery management system.
Plus probably cheaper overall construction because a higher percentage is spent on just energy capacity from economy of scale at the pack level (more cells per pack: less overhead from other components when normalized per-cell).
Doesn't help that they'd prefer to keep the grid voltage out of the metal framed vehicle, and there's economic incentives to regulate the charging voltage/current at the transformer directly without any intermediate voltage like USB.
Maybe using USB-PD signaling for the finely adjustable voltage modes (PPS/AVS) could help though, at least if USB-PD coding has reasonable range left in the protocol fields there to communicate the entire voltage and current range that such an e-vehicle charger would want.
Though there's other readily suitable communication protocols to pick from if USB-PD isn't suitable.
Quick question while we’re on the topic of CSV files: is there a command-line tool you’d recommend for handling CSV files that are malformed, corrupted, or use unexpected encodings?
My experience with CSVs is mostly limited to personal projects, and I generally find the format very convenient. That said, I occasionally (about once a year) run into issues that are tricky to resolve.
A gas station near me has stickers on pumps with a QR code that supposedly links to a rewards app. I may be wrong, but I think it says something about paying through the app. Seems perfect for phishing.
Bought it and it looks greater. However, I am wary due to the permissions where the extension "can read sensitive information."
I understand that there's probably no way around this, but still.
Yeah, that’s unfortunate that we have to trust developers to that extent. OTOH, it is true that they could get a lot of information once we give them the right to inject some JavaScript in every webpage we load. Personally, I have enabled it only on YouTube so they should not be able to touch the rest.
Cool. Thanks! I guess this feature is not available on macOS pre-Monterey (i.e. Big Sur)? I could not find it neither in macOS / System Preferences nor Safari / Preferences / Extensions.
When you activate it the first time, it asks whether it should be active for all websites or only the current one. You can also change that later in the settings. At least on iOS; I’ll need to check but I think it’s the same on recent macOSes.
I just had a newish (but out-of-warranty) LG 4k monitor go bad on me. The picture went mostly dark, with a few streaks of white. I figured how to take off the back panel, but then got them stuck removing the EM shield covering the main board. I got all of the screws off, but then it wouldn't come off.
There are different definitions of "we" there. Do you think of "we" as the human race or "we" as in yourself and your partner or maybe your immediate family? Not everyone thinks of "we" in the same way.
If you're so narcissistic/nihilistic/whatever as to fall into the latter group, what do you care? Appeals to future generations won't work on people who only care about themselves.
They also won't work on people who only care about next quarter's earnings, either, and that's another issue.
I am actually one of those nihilists, in that I have no stake in the next generation and only a faint interest in "the good of humanity", but what I care about is the fact that climate change denialism is part of a constellation of anti-intellectualism that makes my life worse today, right now.
Climate change denialism has enormous overlap with the people who promote COVID denialism. Even before that crisis, they were responsible for creationism and anti-same-sex-marriage (which has since become legal without the world collapsing).
These aren't matters of opinion, values, or world-view. They're Just Plain Wrong. Nor am I talking about fringe opinions; these are political party platforms and talking points that candidates rely on to attract voters.
There are tons of other areas where I am quite certain they're wrong, but more importantly, they argue about them using the same poor forms that they use for climate change. They cherry-pick, they are manipulated by deliberate disinformation, and they place their own ignorance over knowledge.
That creates a hostile, toxic atmosphere in which there is no way for me to convince them, even on the things that are as conclusively scientific as it's possible for a thing to be. That makes it beyond impossible in areas where there might actually be room for legitimate disagreement.
So yeah, I care a lot about climate change, but not because I'll be alive, nor my direct descendants. The way we talk about climate change makes my life a lot worse, today. I believe that we've seen a deliberate inculcation of an anti-intellectual bent in the US that has become weaponized.
Maybe I'm not rich enough to get it, but let's say I do only care about me, and no one else. In the event of catastrophic climate collapse, sure, I could hypothetically escape on my evil villian billionaire yacht to Oceania, but even if I'm personally fine, my estate (as rich people call their houses) is going to be destroyed. My Miami beachfront condo is literally underwater, as is my Venice summer home, and NYC condo.
Let's say I'm rich and selfish and care only about things and not people. If I bother to look into the future, don't I have more real estate to lose than the poors, who might have one (or fewer!) homes to lose?
Your second point, that long term thinking is hard seems to be a bigger issue, even more so for anybody who is living paycheck-to-paycheck. It's too difficult to get rid of, eg, single use plastic in my life as an ordinary consumer. How do we set things up so the system is incentivized to change itself? Especially when the culture is opposed to any change in the first place.
I didn't really bring up rich vs not rich, because it's more about empathetic vs narcissistic or societal vs anti-social. The event of a catastrophic climate collapse that you describe is probably not going to happen in our lifetimes, so if you're of the anti-social mindset, what do you care what happens to the Earth or society at large, especially after you're gone? Some people aren't going to change their behavior for the benefit of people they'll never even meet (separated by space or time), let alone never care about.
Hope there is no situation where another planet comes into existence and there scientists discover that there was a planet named "Earth" like we read now.
An anonymous person saying "trust me. I am a professional in some tangentially related field and I did an analysis" won't carry much weight in a court (nor should it).
