You're basically claiming that it is legal for the government to comply with the Constitution by selectively redefining the meaning of the words used by specific articles - to the point that said meaning is significantly beyond modern colloquial meaning, the original meaning at the time the article in question was written, or even basic common sense - so as to get the interpretation they want. It certainly is the established modus operandi - first they did it with "militia" to undermine the 2nd Amendment, then they did it to "interstate commerce" to turn the Commerce Clause into a carte blanche. But I'm pretty sure that any of the people who originally wrote or ratified the US Constitution would not imagine it in their wildest dreams, much less consider it lawful.

Only if the teacher is Calvinist, though.

Because evolution is the core of modern science, with plenty of solid experimental validation.

And? Social constructs objectively exist, and it's definitely good to know how they come about.

By the way, while races are merely averaged idealizations, they do correspond to actual genetical differences between large populations, as pharmacologists well know. So, no, they are not purely social constructs.

"Class" and "object" have somewhat hazy definitions if you consider all existing shades of OOP/OOD (including prototype-based etc), but in Java specifically, they refer to certain very specific and definite things. So it shouldn't be hard to nail that down.

There are no function pointer types in Project Lambda. This was discussed in earlier proposals, but ultimately abandoned. Lambdas there are just syntactic sugar for anonymous implementations of a certain kind of interfaces or abstract classes (SAM-types).

They're planning to provide some stock generic interfaces for general-purpose callbacks, but given that Java generics don't play well with primitive types, it's still quite a mess (you're going to see a lot of this kind of thing).

The device is made by Chinese. The guy doesn't quite understand how it actually works. So he is trying to figure out how the Chinese did that.

But, of course, if you go looking for racism, you will always find it.

There's nothing contradictory between fascism and capitalism. China is both in large proportions.

This is very much oversimplifying the part of Medvedev in this story (as well as the story in general).

This whole mess started when an FSB official (head of their department of information and telecommunication security), in the course of an official meeting, brought up GMail, Hotmail and Skype as an example of a "security problem" due to impossibility of wiretaps (as servers are outside the country, and HTTPS ensures secure connection to them from within), and suggested a ban (neither TFS nor TFA mention this!).

Shortly after, an official from president Medvedev's administration stated that the ban - and, more broadly, the whole idea that foreign-hosted services are a "security issue" - is a personal opinion of that particular FSB person, and does not represent the official position of that organization nor government as a whole.

Shortly after that, prime minister Putin's press secretary stated that this is incorrect, and the position is the official position of FSB, that it is well-argued and reasonable, and that Putin takes it with all due consideration.

So basically it's more of the same thing that we've seen before. Whether it's a genuine power struggle between president and prime minister (the elections are less than a year away), or whether they're playing out a scripted "good cop / bad cop" in preparation for the same, is yet to be seen.

NSA probably does have access to GMail etc storage (even if Google doesn't know that), but they aren't proposing to ban, say, gmx.de, on the grounds that they have no means of accessing the storage there, nor intercept user communication over HTTPS. Nor will they complain if you host your own mail server and use secure protocols to communicate. Neither TFS nor TFA explain it, but what really made the whole thing so shocking is that FSB blokes have called for banning GMail, Skype etc in Russia unless some means of access are provided. In other words, they want government-mandated backends to all forms of communication, and to ban anything that can't be wiretapped. It should also be noted that the use of strong crypto by organizations (rather than private individuals) is heavily regulated in Russia, with most activity requiring special certification. Using foreign-hosted systems is seen as a workaround for the law.

There is, actually, just not in Russia.

It's not particularly similar, aside from that both now and then ruling elites cling to power at all costs. However, the social and economical structure they impose on society is vastly different.

It's even technically incorrect. For example, KGB was also responsible for foreign intelligence, which FSB does not do.

Let me guess, you're an MBA.

What's wrong with the way (ANSI) JOIN works? It's practically right out of relational algebra. As an aside, the term "NoSQL" has very little to do with SQL-as-language, and really is about relational vs other. Some "NoSQL" solutions provide SQL as a query language for their datasets, and there are some relational databases out there that don't use SQL as a query language, but would not count as "NoSQL".