Here's a thought. Major in a career that pays itself back. And then when you have a REAL job, and your bills are paid, take part-time classes in anything you damn well please that "educates you" for as long as you like. You seem to think that education is something that happens in your teens and early 20's, and ends when you graduate college.

Alternatively, if you don't mind having a low wage your entire career being in something as over-populated under-demanded as Art History:

If you went to a state school to begin with (the state pays typically HALF); and your parents weren't jackasses and actually contribute the expected funds (see Expected Family Contribution), you should be able to work part-time (or not at all) and have ZERO student loans at the end.

The only people taking out loans should be people with super promising careers (Doctors, Lawyers, child prodigies going to super schools), and people whose parents are cheap bastards who don't mind getting a tax break for their children and not using that money to pay for their children's college.

Duh. A domain identified as malicious gets banned universally on Facebook. Not on a single protocol level.

If you saw one IP address pelting your computer with spam, would you block a single port, or the whole damn thing?

GO GO GADGET ADBLOCK

They should have gotten degrees in gender studies. At least inbetween serving coffee, they'd still get plenty of national news attention as well as a spotlight on Slashdot every week.

Uhh... Microsoft is also an operating system company. Which is why their Office products have only been for Windows Phone up until they realized nobody wanted one.

It's entirely possible that Google intentionally takes a smaller MARGIN on the Android revenue. Which could be them intentionally trying to help the Android market flourish with lower costs.

I've posted elsewhere in this thread so I can't mod you up, but I have to say that's a pretty insightful comment. It may be wrong, since I myself definitely went out of my way for an Android. But you certainly could be representing a different demographic than I'm used to.

I recently got a Galaxy S5 for me, and my wife got a cheapish LG L90. She was telling her younger, teenage sister about her phone. She mentioned the LG L90 and her sister went "Meh." then she mentioned my phone was an S5 and her sister went "Really?!?!".

I'm officially an old fart because I don't see what's "cool" about a phone. But she definitely thought my phone was.

The article reads like an Android hit piece.* The ONLY thing Android has to do is wait for Apple to slip up. ONE bad PR move and people flock to the competitor. One story of an Apple contractor selling user secrets to China and poof.

Remember Intel's Itanium failure? AMD swept in with x64 and their Athlon 64 and owned the market place for the first time in their competitive history. Unfortunately, AMD then had a huge failure of their own (somewhere around Bulldozer) and Intel went right back to washing the floor with them.
Remember when Apple gave away a free U2 album and their users were furious? They were furious because it was hidden from them and done without consent--not that they were getting something free. Something as small as that drove people away from Apple because of what it represented: It showed that upper management at Apple didn't understand your privacy or will at all.

*(ALL HAIL CORPORATE SLASHDOT. THINK FOR US. TELL US WHAT TO BELIEVE.)

Wikipedia has had lots of high profile problems lately, like when they refused to let the author of a book, correct the Wikipedia entry about his own book. BUT, he could write a blog post, and then LINK to that post, and it'd be okay because it's somehow more verifiable.

It also has lots of problems with hardcore progressives / gender warriors (::cough::slashdot owners::cough::) going ape-shit on all of the gender-related articles and reverting, censoring, and forcing out anyone who disagrees with the people who squat on those pages. So the highest user council on Wikipedia eventually had to ban them from editing those articles. At which point, the progressives cried censorship!

Wikipedia has passed its high point of reliability, now that people realize they can control it for their political agendas.

The AC brings up a good point. You bastards never give us a break when we have to decide between a giant douche and a turd sandwich, so why should we give you one?

I don't care if Hot Topic owns them. I rarely buy anything from ThinkGeek anyway with their "Best Buy"-level price markups. I can't imagine them raising their prices much more for something as silly as a "USB powered Pacman LED lamp" at $32... plus $7.00 shipping (more than it actually costs to ship).

>Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...