3
The reason we don’t see exploding battery attacks more often is not because it’s technically hard, it’s because the erosion of public trust in everyday things isn’t worth it.
(www.bunniestudios.com)
edit: after 20 comments, i'm adding a post description here, since most of the commenters so far appear not to be reading the article:
This is about how surprisingly cheap it is (eg $15,000) to buy a complete production line to be able to manufacture batteries with a layer of nearly-undetectable explosives inside of them, which can be triggered by off-the-shelf devices with only their firmware modified.
That does not make them exploding batteries, it had explosives in them. A suicide bomber is not an explosive human.
Do bombs explode? Or is it the explosives inside of them that are exploding?
They're batteries. And they are explosive because of the explosives in them. They are discrete things that are explosives.
You're trying to make a weird, un-useful, pedantic distinction here.
Comment you replied to was making a far more useful correction, because people did not read the article.
It's a needed distinction because the Israeli committed more war crimes with what they did.
A suicide bomber is not an explosive human but they are an exploding human.