Not ready to agree or disagree with your points at this time, but I will say that my test of FreeBSD was originally done just for grins. But it worked so well (as well as any of the GNU/Linux versions I tested) that it is now at the top of the short list.

I've been playing with various GNU/Linux distributions lately. Since I'm looking to run KDE, I can settle on a reasonable feature set that needs to work.

.

On a lark, I happened to install FreeBSD with KDE. It worked just as well as any of the GNU/Linux distributions. I wanted to look at PC-BSD, but my test notebook is 32-bit only, So I'll have to save that test for another day.

So now I'm wondering, since everything I need to do is available so long as I am able to run KDE, why does the underlying OS matter at all?

Well, if it is a new language, by definition any attention it gets, no matter how little, is "more attention".

.

When the comparison is against zero, it does not take too much to have a 100% improvement. :)

Really, everyone needs to be an app developer? Why?

When you are looking for people to join your team, the process usually consists of asking the candidate questions about the technology you are currently using. That's the wrong approach, unless, of course, you want to lock yourselves into what you are doing now.

.

What you should be probing is how well a candidate is able to learn and apply new technology.

When you are interviewing, you are looking for a candidate to help you move into the future, not stay with what you have now. The questions you should ask need to expose how a candidate learns and adapts to new technologies and the application thereof.

If you ask the wrong questions, you'll get the wrong answers.

Keep in mind that when speaking of bell curves, the sample size needs to be appropriate to the conclusions you are attempting to draw from the data.

.

In other words, if you are trying to draw a bell curve based upon the 10 people you've interviewed, {bluntly speaking} you should not be in a position to interview people.

So, it's that obvious? :)

The primary purpose of most current home automation systems is data harvesting about the home's occupants. The actual automation of the home is a secondary purpose designed to get the harvesting inside the home.

Some lights in my house have been controlled by X-10 devices from back when it was called BSR X-10 some 35 years ago. Aside from replacing batteries in the remotes, and replacing the remotes every decade or so, the system still functions as well as it did when I first installed it.

.

The X-10 protocol itself is not as reliable as some of the current home control protocols, but the simplicity makes up for a lot of its shortcomings.

As I type, the X-10 main control unit has turned on a light in the living room, getting ready for sunset.

sample size too small.

Pat, someone here needs to buy a humor clue..... :)

And about half are above average.

Opening the trunk of your car to get something for the policeman then allows the policeman to search the trunk. Once you hand the phone over to the policeman, he can search it.

Where I live, and based upon my experience :), the policeman asks you for your license and insurance card, then walks back to his/her vehicle to do the checks. There is no way for the policeman to scan the QR code while the phone is in your possession in your car. You would have to give up possession of your phone to the policeman while the checks are being performed.

google tranlate is quite good

Obviously, it is better than my spelling. :)