Android does some estimations based on battery behaviour to make the percentage display more accurate.

This is just the user facing component, of course, but "50%" doesn't mean much if the displayed percentages aren't compensating for an older battery losing the last 25% of its charge in a few minutes because the cells are degraded.

I don't know if there's anything like that on desktop Linux, but I certainly wouldn't say calibration isn't a thing anymore. It's just done automatically and hidden from the user.

Firefox had a nasty video decoding performance bug a while back that hit YouTube particularly bad (because it affected webm streams). That's been so solved for a while, though.

If you're buying a new SSD, you probably won't need to worry about this. Just make sure to boot the installer in UEFI mode (usually the default). In the worst case, you'll need to go into the motherboard settings and put Linux above Windows in the boot menu.

Only in MBR mode. On computers less than 10 years old, you can go into the UEFI settings and put Grub above the Windows bootloader in the boot order list.

Some broken computers only boot the "flash got wiped, let's hope this one works" fallback bootloader. Windows and Grub will fight for that one, but that should only happen if your motherboard's UEFI settings got reset or if the firmware is buggy.

Aside from Edge, the Netflix app will also work. Basically, Netflix doesn't send you a 4k stream without PlayReady or an equivalent level of DRM, which native apps typically also will (though your experience may vary on Android if you buy cheap Chinese phones).

There are addons that will get you 1080p on Linux instead of the 720p that you get by default. They break every now and then, but at least full HD is possible without too much effort.

That's what was thinking of. No idea if it's even feasible but it'd help concentrate the power requirement to a more manageable position.

I don't think any open-source products have anything close to what Google Maps offers.

Microsoft has Here which also does a bit of vehicle tracking to get traffic data. I think TomTom may still be in business, but that's quite expensive.

Some governments have their own accident/road disturbance databases available for companies or the public, but you'll have to be lucky to find ones that support your local area if your government even provides such a service.

Lots of Elon fanboys like cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrency is extremely effective at taking money away from victims with no way to reclaim it, and is basically uninsurable.

It's not just Musk, though. Scams also use the faces of other rich people. Musk seems to be very popular scamming the tech scene, but every billionaire has had scams associated with them.

I don't think the second coming of Christ will have a tough job proving himself. Apocalyptic monsters and the dead rising would be a pretty clear way to prove the supernatural. So yes, it sure is possible.

People have certainly tried to prove weaker supernatural events. That includes government researchers looking into telepathy. Double blind tests have so far failed to prove every scientific claim about supernatural powers and experiences brought forward so far.

I haven't seen any convincing evidence of the supernatural and the onus of proof is on the one that comes with the claim. Often, these claims are vague, imprecise, and noncommittal, so the proof is often weak and impossible to verify. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, as they say, and so far all the evidence I've been presented with had come down to "someone wrote this in a book millenia ago" and "I just feel it".

You can prove a negative in the mathematical sense, sure. You can't prove a negative when the supernatural gets involved. Physics, chemistry, and biology aren't Maths, and the supernatural isn't formally defined mathematics.

Quantum mechanics show a break between the classical understanding of physics and the equations and laws derived from plain observation and the probabilistic and unstable nature of matter and energy at the smallest observable level.

Physics isn't a done deal, we don't know how a lot of stuff works. Our simplified classical models clearly don't work on every level, but that doesn't mean gravity suddenly doesn't pull the earth and the moon towards each other.

Large scale physics (somewhere between molecules and stars) is full of simplified models. From spherical cows to "assume you're walking along a perfectly straight, frictionless surface in a vacuum", very few of the formulae taught in school actually model what really happens. They're approximations that work at every relevant scale of physics, as we lack the ability to accurately simulate the chaotic nature of individual particles and energy fields.

Scientists were initially hoping that we could use Newton's laws to describe how atoms interact (and then quarks and such, when they were discovered) and quantum theory has proven that this is not possible. That does not prove or disprove the existence of a higher being, it just proves that earlier extrapolations were wrong.

There's no common definition of "natural cause" within physics as a science, so there's no way to prove or disprove anything regarding natural causes. You can define the term within a specific paper, but that just proves or disproves something within the confines of that specific paper, experiment, and definition. I can call a puddle of water "Jesus", evaporate the puddle, and claim to have killed God, but outside of my own wacky experiment nothing religious has happened.

Science will never be able to prove a negative, so no matter what happens, belief in the mere existence of the supernatural is always a possibility. Religion brings forth very few scientifically provable facts. We know lightning is caused by electrical discharge now, but we'll never be able to prove that it's not caused by an invisible Donar riding around in the heavens, swinging his hammer.

This is because of the way Lemmy solves the "missing responses" problem. ActivityPub doesn't mandate a specific way to federate likes and responses, but the way Mastodon does this causes every server to have different replies and likes.

Lemmy forces the comments and likes to federate by boosting every one of them from the community actor, therefore ensuring that every server sees every comment. On Mastodon, you only see comments made by people someone on your server follows.

This leads to another rather annoying Mastodon problem, where someone will ask a question or pose a problem and will get a million of the same replies because everyone replying thinks they're the first to come up with an answer (as their server shows a small subset of replies). It can look like a storm of reply-guys and probably doesn't help Mastodon gain any popularity.

Lemmy and Mastodon both do this correctly from a spec point of view, but it's an example of how two correct implementations of the same spec can still have trouble interoperating.