I like them a lot.

My wife has an ipad that she gets to use. (She's a teacher at a school, it belongs to the school.) I'm not a big fan of iOS. It feels too restrictive to me.

No - not settings.

I move around between devices a lot - phones and so on. You can set what you want saved but for me it is photos, contacts, apps - not sure about what else.

Stuff that normally lives in the cloud anyway (keep, gmail, so on) of course all come back.

On this one it gave me the option to put my icons back on the home screens and I chose it but it didn't work.

But I'm pretty good at getting things back to the way I want pretty quickly on account of doing stuff like this so often.

The omitted detail is that it will be raining free beer.

Amazon would do anything for your love, but it won't do that.

You can have/use this idea for free:

Before a system will build said code, have the build system verify the code not only by the public key/code hash, but as a secondary method - the code fingerprint of the author in question.

This turns a creepy idea into something worthwhile.

I have yet to meet a really competent programmer. I don't consider myself much beyond capable - but I have too many flaws in my output to be considered really brilliant.

I have worked with or dealt with the output of other programmers who's performance was egregious - most egregious was the contractor who's naive use of a commercial java framework managed to produce the effect of a memory leak in java (e.g. hamstrung java's built-in garbage collection mechanism).

Experience has taught me practical measures of quality programmers in no particular order:

1. They must know how to program at the most simple level (e.g. competency in structured programming in C would be a good starting point - a basic understanding of LISP programming a plus) before tackling more complex programming tasks. I get the sense there are a lot of cut-and-paste programmers out there who really don't understand what the underlying code they are creating is actually doing.

2. Have an innate ability to focus on simple solutions, rather than being clever. KISS principle must be understood and brought into every design decision from the start. That is not to say there are no complexities, but understanding what is simple given the problem at hand - some simple things are complex when compared to other systems - and having the ability to avoid needless complexity.

3. Literate - must be able to not only communicate effectively externally - but also their comments in code should illuminate the subject matter in a clear, concise manner. Ideally should be able to get workable technical documentation straight from their comments - via doxygen or the like (perldoc, pydoc etc).

4. Their code must be maintainable and extendable. If an average programmer cannot maintain the code, and is required to rewrite the system from scratch - then you have failed as a quality programmer. Change is inevitable - how resilient your system is to change is a measure of your ability as a programmer.

5. They must understand a lot about technology outside of the world of their application. Their application will live in a world of networks, machines (physical and virtual), storage systems, communication protocols, and APIs - they must understand the implications of software design choices given a set of environmental requirements. The best programmers not only know how to code up systems, but also how to give advice about what their systems will be capable of doing given the environment, or lack thereof - and act upon that if it is possible to adjust via changes to software alone (e.g. choosing multithreading/multiprogramming design over single thread of execution).

6. They must be able to create secure code. If the company they work for doesn't produce a guide to that, then they should develop that on their own - and live by it - and consistently improve it. If they are using frameworks/libraries written by someone else, they should audit or test it to be sure the underlying implementation is secure.

7. Must be able to get along with others and work as part of a team; ideally if they are really a quality programmer, I would expect them to also mentor and share their ideals and capabilities with their peers to bring everyone up as much as possible. Quality programmers are not primadonnas.

That's it from my standpoint.

No: Niklas.

Sure.

Yo momma so fat,
She fell in love in the Spring,
And somehow broke it.

Not bad, but I think Barb's was actually pretty good.

I dismissed them as neckbeards and accountants.

I'd argue/debate/discuss it with you, but I find it an issue for the history books. Besides, I think I'm stuck in meetings for five of the next eight hours :(

OK. Question:

Answer:

Regret lateness of last night's reply resulting in an incomplete thought.

Thank you for making my argument for me. Private sector unions are an obvious extension of freedom of association. But public sector unions, as you note, work for their members. The inescapable conclusion is that a public sector union, over time, is going to serve its members, to the detriment of the public.
We understood that the Commies were attacking the culture, subverting academia and Hollywood. One must offer props to them for infiltrating the IRS. The suppression of the Tea Parties leading up to the 2012 election, with a wink from the GOP, and to the surprise of Mitt the Milquetoast, was a brilliant bit of work.

I have faith in God and confidence in the basic principles upon which the country is founded.
The Constitution is an expression of a lack of faith in people, irrespective of their labels du jour.
Your bogus rate of fire argument is a (perhaps not deliberate) attempt to distract from the 2A's absolute right of self defense.
The NRA is so strong, and the blowback against gungrabbers so strident, because nobody is buying the 'boil the frog' argument. The Left is understood to argue in bad faith, because the Left ultimately hates liberty and wishes to reduce a free people to livestock.

Let's flip that around, and inquire why the 14th Amendment has been used to incorporate the entire Bill of Rights except the 2A, against the smaller governments?
Hint: "educe a free people to livestock" is the ultimate goal.