7 ms·

> I have been a long time enthusiast of high power flashlights. We typically use 18350, 18650, 21700, or 26650. But I have been in dismay as even in this commun

> I have been a long time enthusiast of high power flashlights. We typically use 18350, 18650, 21700, or 26650. But I have been in dismay as even in this community, companies are starting to move away from these standards and provide proprietary batteries (Olight) or sealed (some newer Fenix models). We went through this exact cycle with laptops and cellular phones. The hardcore internet users were furious when companies dared to remove the option for a user-replaceable battery. But the market reacted positively. And honestly, it turned out fine. I could get replacement aftermarket batteries for my iPhone and MacBooks for a long time, and now I can even get genuine replacement parts when I need them. I see a lot of parallels in the flashlight world: The hardcore collectors who value their ability to swap out batteries, experiment with different cells, and carry their batteries from one light to the next are furious. Yet the average buyer probably prefers the features afforded by the custom battery solutions. The standardized-battery flashlights are still readily available. The market will avoid the proprietary solutions if that's really what the market feels, but I suspect these companies actually have a good idea about what their customers are looking for.

pixl97 4y ago
Cellphones are devices that cost hundreds of dollars and gave a store on every other streetcorner that can repair them. Doing this to flashlights is just creating e-waste. Your average company knows the average buyer is an idiot and will gladly burn the earth selling them junk. We had to heavily regulate the food industry to prevent bad actors from causing negative effects, looks like the same needs to happen with e-goods.
- eru 4y ago
  > We had to heavily regulate the food industry to prevent bad actors from causing negative effects, [...] Sounds like 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' to me.
  - klodolph 4y ago
    What? Do you have some specific argument that you want to make against food industry regulations, or are you just trying to point out logical fallacies?
    - eru 4y ago
      As people get richer, they can and will afford better food, including from suppliers with better reputation. As people get richer, they also often tend to demand stricter regulation, but that doesn't necessarily mean the regulation is the driving factor. The Chinese market for eg baby formula might be a good example. On average, baby formula consumed in China today is less dodgy than it was in the past. A big part of that is because everyone in China who can afford to will use imported baby formula. Places like Australia haven't really changed their regulation much, but their products made up a larger share of the Chinese market over time, just because more Chinese became rich enough. In parallel, driven by the same public sentiment that drives the import business, Chinese authorities have enacted stricter and stricter regulation for local baby formula. In this case, consumer preference is driving a move towards higher quality. Competition from overseas suppliers is a key factor in helping consumers vote their preferences with their wallets. Regulation plays a trailing role at best. Of course, when you look back in a few decades and compare the quality of baby formula in 1990 vs 2050 in China you will both notice an enormous increase in quality and increasingly strict regulation. It will be very easy to spin the story that the regulation drove the increase in quality. P.S. For a similar example, have a look at https://www.econlib.org/find-the-date-of-osha/ https://www.econlib.org/find-the-date-of-osha/
      - pixl97 4y ago
        >The Chinese market for eg baby formula might be a good example Um, what? The Chinese government executed people over adulterations of products. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna28787126 https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna28... Sorry for the Amp link
        throwaway290 4y ago
  - BurritoAlPastor 4y ago
    Are you suggesting that it might be just coincidental that companies stopped putting chalk dust in milk at about the same time that doing so became illegal?
    - eru 4y ago
      Citation needed. See what I wrote for https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32373369 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32373369 and also have a look at https://www.econlib.org/find-the-date-of-osha/ https://www.econlib.org/find-the-date-of-osha/
      - morsch 4y ago
        https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/19th-century-fight-bacteria-ridden-milk-embalming-fluid-180970473/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/19th-century-f...
    - nmz 4y ago
      Some cookies are still made with sawdust.
tomrod 4y ago
Who speaks for "the market?"
- eru 4y ago
  Buyers and sellers with their wallets?
  - tomrod 4y ago
    And when sellers decide forced deprecation and e-waste are acceptable, consumers aren't really deciding.
    - eru 4y ago
      Different sellers have different policies, customers can pick which (if any) policy they like better. New supplier can enter the market.
      - CamperBob2 4y ago
        If it actually worked that way, we wouldn't be having this conversation, would we?
        vladvasiliu 4y ago
        We would, since I'd argue most people (hence, "the market") find having sealed batteries "acceptable", or, at least, not reason enough to not buy the product. Most of the people I know replace their phones often enough that it doesn't seem to be a problem, and usually the battery isn't the issue. They mostly break them / get stolen / they just want the new shiny.
        ClumsyPilot 4y ago
        Thep problem with Market Extremists, is they they are so high on their own supply, they do not notice when they make statements that outright contradict the real world we live in. They live in a separate fantasy land, just like communists do. Fist falsifiable statement about e-waste policies - if it is so easy to read a company's e-waste policy, could you tell me which companies had policies that said "we will ship this waste to Indonesia and Africa, where it will de dumped without reprocessing and poison children'? If companies are so open about this information, and they want consumers to have a choice, then why do they send armed goods to beat up journalists investigating E-waste supply chain? If I buy a phone from a company that says 'we fully reprocess every single atom' and then it turns out they don't, why do they not go to jail for fraud? Second falsifiable statement - 'people find having sealed batteries "acceptable" - this claim is not difficult to check - have you ever asked people on the street what they think about this? Have you looked at polls? Majorify of people prefer removable batteries.
MereInterest 4y ago
> The market will avoid the proprietary solutions if that's really what the market feels I don't really buy into (no pun intended) any argument that relies on the efficient market hypothesis. As this article pointed out, there's a vast asymmetry of information, which prevents an efficient market, even in theory. > but I suspect these companies actually have a good idea about what their customers are looking for. I suspect these companies have a good idea about what will cause their customers to purchase more often, and which parts cannot be evaluated on a showroom. Replaceable batteries would add tremendous value for customers, and battery life is frequently the most desired feature in surveys.
- eru 4y ago
  > As this article pointed out, there's a vast asymmetry of information, which prevents an efficient market, even in theory. What kind of theory are you using here? There might be some theoretical reasons to expect that symmetric information (and a few other conditions) will lead to an efficient market. But that doesn't mean that a pre-existing information symmetry is necessary for an efficient market. The classic example is the 'market for lemons', a paper about the information asymmetry in the market for used cars: layman buyers typically can't judge a used car well via a short inspection. That was supposed to prevent an efficient market where you can buy quality goods. Of course, the business solution to this problem is fairly straightforward and profitable: reputation. You run your company with strict standards, so over time you build up a reputation and charge a premium for that. In addition you can sell warranties, too. A really simple example is white goods: it's really hard to judge a dishwasher when you just see them in the store. There's reviews I can look at, but I can also just go and buy a Miele dishwasher. They are pricey, but I also know that they are extremely high quality and will last. For a while, Miele could ride that reputation and sell shoddy products until the market catches up. But it's more profitable for them in the long run to defend their reputation. (Also employees would probably rebel against a change in policy. Many people like to take pride in their work.) This is all without regulation having a binding impact: shoddy dishwashers are just as legal as premium dishwashers.
  - pessimizer 4y ago
gonzo41 4y ago
The market made a mistake and the resulting E waste is a bad externality for the environment.
pessimizer 4y ago
> But the market reacted positively. What does this mean? That people didn't swear off using smartphones entirely after every manufacturer decided that sealed-in batteries would sell more phones?
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  its simple - you are a decision maker, you need a higher power to approve of your decision, to show the people you were right. It used to be God, now its the market. Before priests would help you veil your decisions in religious terms. Now economists help you veil them in economic terms. When everything is going okay, tou can use that as divine approval for any random decision you made. When everything is going badly, you can blame it on any random decision you opponents made. We look at a downturn after the pandenic as a sign of the divine entity, the market, being displeased. We attempt to applease the divine entity with human sacrifice, by throwing the poor to the wolves and cutting taxes. Anyone that points out that we've been trying the same religious orthodoxy for 40 years with poor results gets labelled a heretic - a socialist.
nmz 4y ago
Laptops are not an emergency item. when the power goes out I for one don't go immediately looking for my laptop. I look for my phone, and then immediately go looking for any flashlight, because I need to save as much power as possible until the power is back up. Every year there's a hurricane, wherever it passes, a good amount of people will be out of power for maybe a week, If you cannot buy a battery in the corner store, you haven't bought a flashlight, you've bought a toy.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- dylan604 4y ago
  In my house, we hand candles and oil lamps instead of flashlights. To this day, I still have more candles than flashlights. A benefit of candles is most people are okay with them being part of the decor and visible where flashlights/torches tend to be in a drawer and maybe the batteries are still good when needed.

pixl97 4y ago

Cellphones are devices that cost hundreds of dollars and gave a store on every other streetcorner that can repair them. Doing this to flashlights is just creating e-waste. Your average company knows the average buyer is an idiot and will gladly burn the earth selling them junk. We had to heavily regulate the food industry to prevent bad actors from causing negative effects, looks like the same needs to happen with e-goods.

eru 4y ago
> We had to heavily regulate the food industry to prevent bad actors from causing negative effects, [...] Sounds like 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' to me.
- klodolph 4y ago
  What? Do you have some specific argument that you want to make against food industry regulations, or are you just trying to point out logical fallacies?
  - eru 4y ago
    As people get richer, they can and will afford better food, including from suppliers with better reputation. As people get richer, they also often tend to demand stricter regulation, but that doesn't necessarily mean the regulation is the driving factor. The Chinese market for eg baby formula might be a good example. On average, baby formula consumed in China today is less dodgy than it was in the past. A big part of that is because everyone in China who can afford to will use imported baby formula. Places like Australia haven't really changed their regulation much, but their products made up a larger share of the Chinese market over time, just because more Chinese became rich enough. In parallel, driven by the same public sentiment that drives the import business, Chinese authorities have enacted stricter and stricter regulation for local baby formula. In this case, consumer preference is driving a move towards higher quality. Competition from overseas suppliers is a key factor in helping consumers vote their preferences with their wallets. Regulation plays a trailing role at best. Of course, when you look back in a few decades and compare the quality of baby formula in 1990 vs 2050 in China you will both notice an enormous increase in quality and increasingly strict regulation. It will be very easy to spin the story that the regulation drove the increase in quality. P.S. For a similar example, have a look at https://www.econlib.org/find-the-date-of-osha/ https://www.econlib.org/find-the-date-of-osha/
    - pixl97 4y ago
      >The Chinese market for eg baby formula might be a good example Um, what? The Chinese government executed people over adulterations of products. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna28787126 https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna28... Sorry for the Amp link
      - throwaway290 4y ago
- BurritoAlPastor 4y ago
  Are you suggesting that it might be just coincidental that companies stopped putting chalk dust in milk at about the same time that doing so became illegal?
  - eru 4y ago
    Citation needed. See what I wrote for https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32373369 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32373369 and also have a look at https://www.econlib.org/find-the-date-of-osha/ https://www.econlib.org/find-the-date-of-osha/
    - morsch 4y ago
      https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/19th-century-fight-bacteria-ridden-milk-embalming-fluid-180970473/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/19th-century-f...
  - nmz 4y ago
    Some cookies are still made with sawdust.

tomrod 4y ago

Who speaks for "the market?"

eru 4y ago
Buyers and sellers with their wallets?
- tomrod 4y ago
  And when sellers decide forced deprecation and e-waste are acceptable, consumers aren't really deciding.
  - eru 4y ago
    Different sellers have different policies, customers can pick which (if any) policy they like better. New supplier can enter the market.
    - CamperBob2 4y ago
      If it actually worked that way, we wouldn't be having this conversation, would we?
      - vladvasiliu 4y ago
        We would, since I'd argue most people (hence, "the market") find having sealed batteries "acceptable", or, at least, not reason enough to not buy the product. Most of the people I know replace their phones often enough that it doesn't seem to be a problem, and usually the battery isn't the issue. They mostly break them / get stolen / they just want the new shiny.
        ClumsyPilot 4y ago
        Thep problem with Market Extremists, is they they are so high on their own supply, they do not notice when they make statements that outright contradict the real world we live in. They live in a separate fantasy land, just like communists do. Fist falsifiable statement about e-waste policies - if it is so easy to read a company's e-waste policy, could you tell me which companies had policies that said "we will ship this waste to Indonesia and Africa, where it will de dumped without reprocessing and poison children'? If companies are so open about this information, and they want consumers to have a choice, then why do they send armed goods to beat up journalists investigating E-waste supply chain? If I buy a phone from a company that says 'we fully reprocess every single atom' and then it turns out they don't, why do they not go to jail for fraud? Second falsifiable statement - 'people find having sealed batteries "acceptable" - this claim is not difficult to check - have you ever asked people on the street what they think about this? Have you looked at polls? Majorify of people prefer removable batteries.

MereInterest 4y ago

> The market will avoid the proprietary solutions if that's really what the market feels I don't really buy into (no pun intended) any argument that relies on the efficient market hypothesis. As this article pointed out, there's a vast asymmetry of information, which prevents an efficient market, even in theory. > but I suspect these companies actually have a good idea about what their customers are looking for. I suspect these companies have a good idea about what will cause their customers to purchase more often, and which parts cannot be evaluated on a showroom. Replaceable batteries would add tremendous value for customers, and battery life is frequently the most desired feature in surveys.

eru 4y ago
> As this article pointed out, there's a vast asymmetry of information, which prevents an efficient market, even in theory. What kind of theory are you using here? There might be some theoretical reasons to expect that symmetric information (and a few other conditions) will lead to an efficient market. But that doesn't mean that a pre-existing information symmetry is necessary for an efficient market. The classic example is the 'market for lemons', a paper about the information asymmetry in the market for used cars: layman buyers typically can't judge a used car well via a short inspection. That was supposed to prevent an efficient market where you can buy quality goods. Of course, the business solution to this problem is fairly straightforward and profitable: reputation. You run your company with strict standards, so over time you build up a reputation and charge a premium for that. In addition you can sell warranties, too. A really simple example is white goods: it's really hard to judge a dishwasher when you just see them in the store. There's reviews I can look at, but I can also just go and buy a Miele dishwasher. They are pricey, but I also know that they are extremely high quality and will last. For a while, Miele could ride that reputation and sell shoddy products until the market catches up. But it's more profitable for them in the long run to defend their reputation. (Also employees would probably rebel against a change in policy. Many people like to take pride in their work.) This is all without regulation having a binding impact: shoddy dishwashers are just as legal as premium dishwashers.
- pessimizer 4y ago

gonzo41 4y ago

The market made a mistake and the resulting E waste is a bad externality for the environment.

pessimizer 4y ago

> But the market reacted positively. What does this mean? That people didn't swear off using smartphones entirely after every manufacturer decided that sealed-in batteries would sell more phones?

ClumsyPilot 4y ago
its simple - you are a decision maker, you need a higher power to approve of your decision, to show the people you were right. It used to be God, now its the market. Before priests would help you veil your decisions in religious terms. Now economists help you veil them in economic terms. When everything is going okay, tou can use that as divine approval for any random decision you made. When everything is going badly, you can blame it on any random decision you opponents made. We look at a downturn after the pandenic as a sign of the divine entity, the market, being displeased. We attempt to applease the divine entity with human sacrifice, by throwing the poor to the wolves and cutting taxes. Anyone that points out that we've been trying the same religious orthodoxy for 40 years with poor results gets labelled a heretic - a socialist.

nmz 4y ago

Laptops are not an emergency item. when the power goes out I for one don't go immediately looking for my laptop. I look for my phone, and then immediately go looking for any flashlight, because I need to save as much power as possible until the power is back up. Every year there's a hurricane, wherever it passes, a good amount of people will be out of power for maybe a week, If you cannot buy a battery in the corner store, you haven't bought a flashlight, you've bought a toy.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dylan604 4y ago
In my house, we hand candles and oil lamps instead of flashlights. To this day, I still have more candles than flashlights. A benefit of candles is most people are okay with them being part of the decor and visible where flashlights/torches tend to be in a drawer and maybe the batteries are still good when needed.