4 ms·

The main risk is fire with the batteries.

arghwhat 3y ago
The energy of such fire is directly correlated to the battery capacity - airpods would probably just get hot and smoke a bit. The case could do more, but still limited in comparison to, say, a phone. So I'd say the main risk of putting those things in your ears is suffering the horrible audio quality.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  Anything that has the potential to release hot gas and flames under pressure into your ears is a safety risk.
  - arghwhat 3y ago
    Sure, then don't use any earbuds that contain batteries. We're dealing with tiny batteries in the 100mWh range here, which is less than 1/100th of phones famous for their... combustibility. Ejection of hot gas requires there to be quite a bit of energy present during the failure so that a certain extreme temperature can be reached. Below that, you'll just get a warm earbud. > hot gas and flames flames are hot gas
    - jacquesm 3y ago
      That's where the brand comes in: they're supposed to have something to lose. And yes, flames are hot gas, but not all hot gas is flames.
      - arghwhat 3y ago
        > That's where the brand comes in: they're supposed to have something to lose. Samsung is a huge brand, and had significant issues with battery fires. The bigger the brand, the less they lose because they swim in money and have specialists dedicated to PR damage control. In fact, brands seem more likely to be the ones that manage to stuff more battery capacity in there, increasing risk and scope of damage.
        jacquesm 3y ago
        Yes, huge brands have problems, but they are at least incentivized to solve them, whereas some no-name company has no such incentive because they have absolutely nothing to lose. And suing Samsung for damages means you are at least sure there is something worth suing.
        arghwhat 3y ago
        This is honestly so incredibly backwards: The big companies cannot lose anything that matters to them, as they're too big and powerful, brushing off even the worst publicity. A small company collapses under pressure, and can be killed by even a viral meme going against them, with the owners suffering personal financial losses as a result. Suing a big company like Samsung is an almost guaranteed loss with you thoroughly crushed and case precedent set so others have no reason to try. Suing a small company is a much more likely win, with reasonable damages.
Projectiboga 3y ago
I was referring to the charging case with the missing heat sink and cut rate or missing charge regulation circuits.

The energy of such fire is directly correlated to the battery capacity - airpods would probably just get hot and smoke a bit. The case could do more, but still limited in comparison to, say, a phone. So I'd say the main risk of putting those things in your ears is suffering the horrible audio quality.

jacquesm 3y ago
Anything that has the potential to release hot gas and flames under pressure into your ears is a safety risk.
- arghwhat 3y ago
  Sure, then don't use any earbuds that contain batteries. We're dealing with tiny batteries in the 100mWh range here, which is less than 1/100th of phones famous for their... combustibility. Ejection of hot gas requires there to be quite a bit of energy present during the failure so that a certain extreme temperature can be reached. Below that, you'll just get a warm earbud. > hot gas and flames flames are hot gas
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    That's where the brand comes in: they're supposed to have something to lose. And yes, flames are hot gas, but not all hot gas is flames.
    - arghwhat 3y ago
      > That's where the brand comes in: they're supposed to have something to lose. Samsung is a huge brand, and had significant issues with battery fires. The bigger the brand, the less they lose because they swim in money and have specialists dedicated to PR damage control. In fact, brands seem more likely to be the ones that manage to stuff more battery capacity in there, increasing risk and scope of damage.
      - jacquesm 3y ago
        Yes, huge brands have problems, but they are at least incentivized to solve them, whereas some no-name company has no such incentive because they have absolutely nothing to lose. And suing Samsung for damages means you are at least sure there is something worth suing.
        arghwhat 3y ago
        This is honestly so incredibly backwards: The big companies cannot lose anything that matters to them, as they're too big and powerful, brushing off even the worst publicity. A small company collapses under pressure, and can be killed by even a viral meme going against them, with the owners suffering personal financial losses as a result. Suing a big company like Samsung is an almost guaranteed loss with you thoroughly crushed and case precedent set so others have no reason to try. Suing a small company is a much more likely win, with reasonable damages.

Projectiboga 3y ago

I was referring to the charging case with the missing heat sink and cut rate or missing charge regulation circuits.