The advantage is that I can occasionally charge it to 80% or 100% if the situation demands it.

The amount of time the battery spends at higher voltage definitely affects its capacity over time. There’s plenty of research on Li-ion battery service life characteristics done with greater scientific rigor than is possible with batteries installed in phones.

It can take longer than the few months these tests required to see the effect. A phone that’s usually stored at 60% will eventually show a big capacity advantage over one that’s stored at 100%. That’s probably mostly true at 80% as well.

For some anecdata, my Pixel 4a has spent most of the past five years limited to 60%. It reports 1152 cycles and 91% capacity.

PCs have a BIOS/UEFI that provides hardware discovery and abstraction to the OS, while phones lack that and need the OS to know what hardware to expect.

20 years ago when the predecessors to modern smartphone hardware were being designed, there probably would have been meaningful costs to adding that kind of flexibility. There probably wouldn’t today, but there’s also no motivation for phone makers to do it.

This was charged as a misdemeanor. No grand jury this time.

I’m on the protestor’s side here, but in general, it probably ought to be illegal to throw sandwiches at people. Some jurisdictions have a separate offense of harassment for offensive or even merely nonconsensual intentional physical contact that presents no risk of injury.

I’d have voted not guilty if I was on that jury, but guilty for the same conduct under different circumstances, such as throwing food at a fast food worker over a customer service issue.

He probably can’t. Absurd as it may sound, he was actually guilty.

Here are model jury instructions for the charge, which include:

There is a forcible assault when one person intentionally strikes another

It doesn’t say that the victim must be struck with something very likely to injure them. Looking at the statute, it turns out that actual physical contact (rather than making a threat without contact) elevates it to a felony - the charge a grand jury previously rejected.

Of course, prosecutors normally apply common sense to charging decisions and don’t prosecute everything that technically qualifies under the strictest reading of a statute.

A quick search suggests all X1 Nano models can run Windows 11, so they won’t be ultra-cheap because of that.

The Wikipedia article about this case suggests the kid knew what the gun was. He threatened to shoot another student, and probably shot the teacher intentionally. This isn’t just a case of a kid randomly playing with a gun.

Of course he’s not criminally responsible for that because he’s six, but he probably needs an intensive intervention to make sure he doesn’t turn into a monster.

Did they manage to find 12 people that will consider a sandwich a weapon

They don’t have to. Here are model jury instructions for the charge, which include:

There is a forcible assault when one person intentionally strikes another

Notably, there’s no requirement that a weapon is used or physical injury is caused. Reading the statute, the fact that there was physical contact elevates it to a felony even without a weapon or injury, but it isn’t charged as a felony here because the grand jury refused to indict.

I hope that the jury finds him not guilty, but if they do it’s jury nullification, not that his actions didn’t technically violate the statute.

I like the ungrounded North American electrical outlet and plug design (NEMA 1-15). It has no safety features, but it’s very compact, and very easy for device manufacturers to create folding plugs for USB power supplies and the like.

I prefer the US spelling of these words. The U doesn’t do anything phonetically and was not present in the Latin from which many of the words derive.

That’s not criminal anywhere to my knowledge, but very creepy for an adult to say to a 13 year old.

I’m against disabling replies entirely, but for disabling notifications. Once a post is out there and other people are participating in the conversation, it’s not just yours anymore.

Not in most states, and some of those that do are unlikely to charge the owner in practice.

I’m going to guess a majority of people wouldn’t file an insurance claim. It would only make sense if

• They have insurance covering theft of property from inside a car, which is far from universal
• The deductible is substantially less than the value of the gun
• The insurance company isn’t likely to raise their premium as a result

In the USA, it’s not rare for people to have gun manufacturer stickers on their car.

Imagine you’re a thief and you see a Smith&Wesson sticker on a car parked outside a building where carrying guns is forbidden.

The National Crime Victimization Survey is conducted by the Census Bureau by interviewing randomly selected households. It gathers information on crimes not reported to the police, and the reporting rate.

It’s probable that people being afraid to talk to anyone who works for the government will affect its results, but it does have some hedges against that, such as enrolling households for a three year span.

I expect we’ll see that reflected in 2025’s numbers when they come out.

The National Crime Victimization Survey shows crime victimization rates being lower than 20 years ago, and far lower than 30 years ago. The rate is relatively steady from 2022 to 2024. This is similar, but not identical to what the FBI Uniform Crime Report shows. The rate of victims reporting crimes to the police increased a little over that time period.

He then said I groomed him.

He was trying to make himself feel better about being creepy with a kid. He’s wrong is this situation. There isn’t really any room for ambiguity.

Neither of us were exactly saints

You were a kid. Kids are entitled to do dumb stuff while figuring out how social interaction works, and should not feel bad about it years later. He was an adult, pretending to be a kid online and being very creepy. Depending on exactly what he said, sent, or requested, his behavior may even be criminal in some jurisdictions.

So, according to the “Fediverse-Observer” (and similar services AFAIK), in terms of software, sorting by user-count, it seems the top four user-bases are

Not relevant to the comment where you posted the following to a Lemmy community from Piefed:

Mastodon is just beginning to rudimentarily connect to PF, but IIRC Lemmy still doesn’t.

Which looks to me like you’re saying “Lemmy still doesn’t connect to Piefed”, but reading it three more times I guess it’s possible you meant “Lemmy still doesn’t connect to Mastodon”.

If you meant the latter, then I do have some idea what you’re talking about. It actually is possible to interact with one from the other with the constraint that Lemmy can only see Mastodon posts that tag communities. It’s not a smooth experience at all to try to consume community-based content from Mastodon.

Reading through this story, I don’t see any mention of sexual contact, which would make it pretty hard for there to be any sexual assault. If I’m reading this right, it looks like you, as a child had a purely online relationship that was half roleplay and half real with an adult.

If you knowingly misled him, kids do dumb things sometimes; don’t do that again. If he knowingly mislead you, he’s an asshole. If he continued having romantic or sexual chats with you knowing your real age, he’s a creep.