Full disclosure: I'm not defending this company for what it does.
For those of you who were tired of the old criminal justice system, be careful what you wish for. To these hackers and many other people, the fact that this company is not illegal in the eyes of the old criminal justice system is irrelevant. To these hackers, it is amoral. These hackers have decided unilaterally what morality is, who is guilty, and how punishment will be executed. Publicly destroying people and businesses that somehow offend somebody else is now the new normal. The old system of justice won't protect you anymore because even if the old system catches these hackers, the damage will be done and can't be undone.

How about simply hiring the people most qualified to do the job? That would probably be from the top schools but not necessarily. They still have to be able to do the job. History repeats itself particularly when people don't learn from history. Case in point, the early chemical engineering industry in the early 20th century. The guy who, in trying to create quinine artificially, ended up creating the world's first artificial dye was a Brit. But, he was taught by a German. At the time, the Germans were very good at opening universities and technical schools and letting anyone in on merit, never mind their family background. Back then in the UK, the people who went to the top schools got in because their family was wealthy and/or powerful. Because of this, the Germans kicked the Brits' ass in industry.
What's happening now is the very same thing. Instead of biasing towards the wealthy and well-connected rather than those who are capable, we're biasing towards other social groups instead of the capable. Countries that don't do this are and will be kicking our ass going forward.

IMHO, This "church" should put their vast amounts of money where their mouth is and take all the mental cases in, house them, feed them, cloth them, and then show the world that they can cure them.

Witness the greed of people who expect to be paid perpetually for something they may or may not have created years ago. I'll bet anyone would take that action if they could. "Hey, man, I made what you called an awesome cheeseburger last year. You owe me royalties." Oh, wait, that does sound stupid.

Didn't Spock fend off some alien creature because his blood was copper-based?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

These days, the people who yell and scream the loudest appear to be the ones winning political debate. Not because they're correct (they're usually wrong) but because the opposing side just wants them to shut the eff up.

If the data doesn't include the past two years or so, then yes but only because the price of gasoline was artificially high. Now that it's come back down out of the clouds, people are driving more. Furthermore, you have to call into question the opinion of anyone who lives in a major city who has never lived in a rural area particularly people living on the East Coast. Those folks can't really comprehend long distance driving and how necessary it is.

Or healthcare.gov?

I'm curious to know what their end-game is. Let's say that the E.U. let's them out of the Euro. What international investor is going to want to risk their money in the country particularly if the government is capable of confiscating other people's money? They've already defaulted on their debt to the IMF. Are they hoping that all of their creditors will decide to forget what they're owed? Even if they all did that, does the country have enough domestic wealth to run itself without outside help?

How the hell does Amazon walk away from this without a scratch? How are they not getting hammered for anti-trust?

No, because if it was then all government websites would require users to use Safari to access them. On OSX only, too.

At what point does exercising one's right to free speech become vigilantism? IMHO, there's a lot of the latter going on these days. Say you don't like some business owner's view on a particular issue. Does that give you the right to destroy that person's career? Do they not have an equal right to free speech? Why is it okay to destroy that person's career through activism and social media when you can't do it through the law?

Hee hee.

Why is the entire test in Java? Not Javascript but actual Java. I mean, at least it's not .NET or C# (aka, platform specific).