I love how he says

"Tellingly, Greenwald never misses a chance to mention Poulsen’s history as a hacker, events that transpired nearly two decades ago and have absolutely no bearing on the current case. This is nothing more than a despicable smear campaign based on the oldest misdirection in the book: Shoot the messenger."

Followed by:

"Similarly, when Assange complained that journalists were violating his privacy by reporting the details of rape and molestation allegations against him in Sweden, Greenwald agreed, writing: “Simultaneously advocating government transparency and individual privacy isn’t hypocritical or inconsistent; it’s a key for basic liberty.” With Manning, Greenwald adopts the polar opposite opinions. “Journalists should be about disclosing facts, not protecting anyone.” This dissonance in his views has only grown in the wake of reports that Manning might be offered a plea deal in exchange for testimony against Assange."

....Is that not the same thing? These two are not opposites; It is merely an attempt to attack Greenwald. Exactly what Hansen is accusing him of.

FTFY

Agreed. As a former Java coder who had to move to C++, moving to C# after those two makes it so much simpler.

There's another group: the dumb kid who is really more of a diversity/sponsored program/goodwill acceptance. At my university (one of the "elite" ones) I have met maybe 10 or so strikingly stupid people in my few years here. For the most part, people are intelligent and able thinkers in most subjects, and while there are people who are skilled in some areas and lagging in others, there are some people who are just plain dumb. These people are lacking common logic, they can't understand basic concepts, and surprisingly (or maybe not), they are mainly from underprivileged areas, usually racially ethnic but culturally white, with no other really identifying features to this group. This isn't to say there aren't rich stupid people or smart people from underprivileged areas or stupid white people (there are) but the the general idiots I see around campus most often tend to be admissions statistic boosters. Then again, I am biased, as I don't hang around rich kids, so I'm probably missing out on that whole rich white dumb kid stereotype.

One thing that top schools also offer is experience, in the form of top internships. As a current student at one of these so-called elite universities, I have had a difficult time applying to internships. I can only imagine how difficult it is for someone with a weaker college on their resume to get these positions. For college freshmen, other than GPA the biggest factor in whether or not they get picked for an internship is their school. I've talked to recruiters; a 4.0 at a non-top 3 state school vs. an ivy league 3.5 will see that job go to the ivy leaguer almost every time (from what I've seen, and from what my friends have seen).

Second year rolls around, and the internship competition that year depends mainly on, you guessed it, where you were your first year (probably 75% is based on that) followed by school/gpa.

The point I am making here is that the elite school alone really only helps in the college internship arena, but that name (if you use it well) can set off a chain of events that CAN make you better prepared than peers who went to worse-ranked universities. Then again, I'm only talking about top jobs in high paying fields here, but then again, that is what students at elite colleges are after.

I'd like to point out one great counterexample: Team Fortress 2. As a longtime player, I have all the extra weapons. However, they don't necessarily give you an advantage. They allow you to customize your play style further, but (with the exception of maybe Natascha) they don't make you significantly stronger. A good player with stock weapons can beat a slightly less good player with custom weapons. The problem in most games is just that the creators aren't creative enough to design a shift in play styles; they would rather just give +10 dmg and leave it at that.

I fail to understand how SCOTUS could be so short-sighted. When they made the ruling, I agreed with their judicial logic, but that was a case where very clearly the ruling was not in the good of the general population. I don't know how much transparency matters; if you can buy an election, you need not bother with appeasing the populace - you can just ignore it.

If this is supposed to be an article about 3g vs 4g vs wifi, as the title led me to believe, why does tfs begin

"Some of the most popular Android smartphones currently available are members of Samsung's Galaxy S line. Powered by Samsung's own 1GHz ARM Cortex A8-based Hummingbird processor with a four-inch Super-AMOLED capacitive touchscreen, it's no wonder Samsung has sold over 5 million Galaxy S phones."

Less blatant next time, please...

Didn't you see the part about it being a sequel? Adrian Grenier doesn't do sequels for less than $20 million.

Everyone talks about America's unquestioned air superiority. I don't doubt it would be an easy win in terms of military power, but what happens if we went up against a force that could hack our planes out of the sky? Seriously, how likely is that? I don't have a good handle on that.

According to military contractor friends, basically, they inflate the bid, then they use that money on another project that is waaaay overbudget, and when the deadline comes around for the project they got funding for, they say "we need more funding" and get it. Repeat ad infinitum.