Fix conclusion in Hamming approach (exercism#3096)

* Fix conclusion in Hamming approach

The information about one of the IntStream being more efficient
just because it has less steps is incorrect because the extra steps
does not result in additional iterations. In regards to the `for` loop,
while the one shown does not show a `final` field, it does not mean
that the code can be written in such a way that it is final.

Fixes exercism#3090

* Remove unused link

Link no longer used since previous commit.

Author: kahgoh

exercises/practice/hamming/.approaches/introduction.md

@@ -127,11 +127,6 @@ For more information, check the [`IntStream` with `reduce()` approach][approach-
 Since benchmarking with the [Java Microbenchmark Harness][jmh] is currently outside the scope of this document,
 the choice between the various approaches can be made by perceived readability.
 
-Of the `IntStream` approaches, the `reduce()` approach likely might be fastest, as it is only one iteration
-instead of an iteration for `filter()` or `map()` and another iteration for `count()` or `sum()`.
-
-The `for` loop may also be fast, but it leaves a mutable member variable for the distance, instead of one marked [`final`][final].
-
 [for]: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/nutsandbolts/for.html
 [intstream]: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/stream/IntStream.html
 [filter]: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/stream/IntStream.html#filter-java.util.function.IntPredicate-
@@ -144,4 +139,3 @@ The `for` loop may also be fast, but it leaves a mutable member variable for the
 [approach-intstream-map-sum]:  https://exercism.org/tracks/java/exercises/hamming/approaches/intstream-map-sum
 [approach-intstream-reduce]:  https://exercism.org/tracks/java/exercises/hamming/approaches/intstream-reduce
 [jmh]: https://github.com/openjdk/jmh
-[final]: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Java_Programming/Keywords/final