Jimid41
Jimid41 t1_jegt3ad wrote
Reply to comment by urzu_seven in eli5: Why do seemingly all battery powered electronics need at least 2 batteries? by OneGuyJeff
Are you arguing that more constricting parameters doesn't equate to a stricter definition?
Jimid41 t1_jegsej8 wrote
Reply to comment by urzu_seven in eli5: Why do seemingly all battery powered electronics need at least 2 batteries? by OneGuyJeff
Oh you have a stricter definition. Let's see it.
Jimid41 t1_jegrr6a wrote
Reply to comment by urzu_seven in eli5: Why do seemingly all battery powered electronics need at least 2 batteries? by OneGuyJeff
> “I’m going to arbitrarily ignore other definitions of the word to focus on an outdated and/or narrowly used definition”
There's nothing arbitrary about it. The definition isn't dated or narrow, it's properly specific.
>Again the use of battery to denote a singular object is well established and 100% valid
Yes just as a truck is a singular thing, that is made up of other things. Nobody is arguing different.
> You can’t ignore the most common usage to try and create a false oxymoron
How often are you speaking of the cell count on batteries to alledge what the most common usage is?
And again, what do you think strictly speaking means? Might it mean according to the strictest definition?
Jimid41 t1_jegpcmo wrote
Reply to comment by urzu_seven in eli5: Why do seemingly all battery powered electronics need at least 2 batteries? by OneGuyJeff
What do you think the phrase "strictly speaking" means? And how often are laymen talking about the cell count in a battery? I wouldn't say the topic is broadly discussed by the general public at all. And in cases where it is the definition and understanding indeed dictates a single cell battery an oxymoron.
Jimid41 t1_jeg1t2c wrote
Reply to comment by urzu_seven in eli5: Why do seemingly all battery powered electronics need at least 2 batteries? by OneGuyJeff
> Strictly speaking, no its not because the words meaning has changed over time, as language often does.
Which is not the case here. It may be common parlance for the layman but they're different for people that use them in industrial settings and they're different according their definitions in the dictionary.
So he's correct. Speaking strictly, it's an oxymoron.
Jimid41 t1_jbi2n2p wrote
Reply to comment by TheWholeOfTheAss in ‘Mike Judge’s Beavis And Butt-Head’ Season 2 Gets April 20, 2023 Premiere Date On Paramount+; Watch Teaser by DemiFiendRSA
He was a lousy son of a bitch.
Jimid41 t1_jaf1obz wrote
Reply to comment by HyrulesRonin in Adding outside GFCI by Unlikely_Play
> unless you want that plug controlled by the switch.
Which is what OP said in their post.
Jimid41 t1_ja8ep8r wrote
Reply to Movies without a main character? by Ok-Impress-2222
Do ensemble casts count as not having a main character? They just have multiple main characters.
Jimid41 t1_ja1k38w wrote
Reply to comment by Autarch_Kade in Amazon faces a lawsuit over products that fuel the donkey skin trade. by tandemuis365
You'd think that would be mentioned in the article.
Jimid41 t1_iuhu8ac wrote
Reply to comment by Turnip48 in ELi5: Why specifically is it oxygen that is required for life? by West_Theory3934
Anaerobic metabolism means without free oxygen. Iirc the oxygen atom is vital to both forms of metabolism. You can't make glucose, pyruvate or hell even DNA without oxygen.
Jimid41 t1_jeh1ekm wrote
Reply to comment by urzu_seven in eli5: Why do seemingly all battery powered electronics need at least 2 batteries? by OneGuyJeff
Good thing in this case validity of the use of the word wasn't in question since it was prefaced with "strictly speaking".