Now to apply this the next time I have to come up with a happy ending.
Ok, but I still want a pocket-sized one so I can help put an end to drones.
“So-called charity, with its implicit assumptions of high and low, is no remedy to injustice, but its willing accomplice. Charity allows the privileged the opportunity to buy the silence of their consciences for a few coins (with the added bonus of much to-do being made of their philanthropy)–rather than wrestle with why, in a world of plenty, they wallow in pampered luxury through no particular virtue of their own, while most of the world is in rags, starving, and living in shacks. Jesus advised the rich man to sell everything he had and give it to the poor. The numerous charities operating under his name ever since have set a significantly lower standard.”
Peter Kropotkin, narrater in “The Watch” by Dennis Danvers
I think it’s because the battery industry doesn’t want them.
Think about it. My tablet lasts about a day between charges. Suppose the battery was 5 times better: 5 days between charges.
BUT… a battery’s life is measured in charge/discharge cycles. Basically, how many times it can be charged. So a battery that can go 5 days between charges has a lifespan 5 times longer than that of a one day battery.
That means the battery industry would sell 1/5th the number of batteries. And they certainly don’t want to reduce their sales!
So it’s battery industry’s fault we don’t have better batteries.
What publishers like best is what’s already been done.
Nobody broke through by writing the same things everyone else has written. Don’t let publishers’ small minds limit you!
Also asks if they stifle it.
A study by two business/economics professors, so it might be like blind men describing an elephant? Or are they confusing creativity with innovation?