Every point in your post is the complete opposite of the truth. It's the Republicans who repeatedly threaten to take away the Government when they don't get concession on top of concession. And most of the safety net programs are designed to keep you from becoming destitute and therefore remain employable instead of becoming a social burden. And the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is not Government health care; It's the opposite of that. You are required to take responsibility for yourself and get yourself insured so we don't have to pay for you when things go wrong, but beyond that it's up to you to make a deal with your own private insurer. They even provide an online free market system in which to do it. It's a Conservative wet dream, but they can't let Obama get credit for it. That's why they have no plan themselves, just repeal and go back to the old system.

So now they're demanding we bring back pre-existing conditions, re-enstate lifetime insurance caps, make it harder for low-income and working class women to control their fertility, make us pay for some uninsured YOLO's emergency room visit, keep graduate students or people starting their career from staying on previous insurance while they're getting on their feet, eliminate preventive care for diabetics and other high-risk individuals forcing them to go to the emergency room when things get bad, eliminate vaccination programs, allow insurers to raise rates to increase their profits arbitrarily, prevent individuals starting businesses to self-insure in an open competitive marketplaces or else they'll shut down the Government, refuse to negotiate a budget, and default on the debt. Yeah. That makes sense.

Why are you defining "Linux" as just the kernel? The original meaning was the entire OS, with the phrase "Linux kernel" referring to just the kernel. If you want to err on the side of brevity, "Linux" is accurate, "GNU/Linux" is what RMS wants everyone to call it, and "GNU/MIT/BSD/Apache/Canonical/RHEL/SUSE/Linux" would be more accurate. I'd advise ignoring the last two options and calling the OS by it's original name-- Linux.

The article is BS, because it assumes there are no legit technical reasons to go to ARM's 64-bit standard. To name a few:
1. Twice as many general purpose registers
2. Twice as wide general purpose registers (so 4x the number of bytes in the register file)
3. Twice as many SIMD registers
4. Double-precision SIMD
5. On-chip encryption
6. Sparse address space for security
7. Memory mapping huge files (49-bit virtual address space)
8. A64 cleaned up the old instruction set quite a bit

And yes, tablets will probably have 8GB of RAM in the next couple of years. The XBox One and PS4 will both have 8GB, and Apple is rumored to be gunning for the living room soon as well, so putting this in the 5s gives them economies of scale before they even release a product.

Besides, the iPhone Simulator has always run on the Mac in x86, so most iPhone software has already shown a high degree of Mac interoperability. In short, having the bittedness in common with the Mac is probably way, way down the list for why they went 64-bit so early.

And while we're at it, why don't we start electricity services which allows everyone to pull down their maximum Wattage 24x7? I think it's completely reasonable to have a very fast connection for when I need it, but cap it so it's not abused. Netflix is essentially a subsidized service these days, and everyone expects to get it for some small fee each month, but the infrastructure can't support that yet.

The entire "operating system" isn't there, but the XNU kernel and UNIX user space are all there up to the latest MacOS X point release. Enough to get a bootable OS with shell and a full suite of UNIX utilities. Honest. Here's some instructions for building the kernel that you can then swap in. Then you can download all the userspace packages and build and swap them in as well. What isn't provided is a nice set of changelogs, package installers, open bug database, etc. But the code is available and BSD licensed.

Yes, it does. Are you asserting some meaning other than having been certified as a Open Brand UNIX 03 registered product, which MacOS X has been since version 10.5?

MacOS X's core OS is open source. You can download the kernel and recompile it and swap yours in if you want to, and all the standard user space stuff is basically FreeBSD.

Also, it is a certified UNIX 03 operating system, so it is more "UNIX" than Linux, which is what I assume you're comparing it to.

The biggest UNIX vendor in the world-- Apple, Inc.-- has had its UNIX laptops increase in market share in almost every quarter for the last 5 years. And although it's not certified UNIX like its desktop sibling, iOS is based on the same core... not sure what value differentiating this specific market segment offers. In the server, Linux seems to be doing just fine, and is close enough to UNIX for it not to matter.

Not to worry... with the sequester, US funding for basic science has slowed to a trickle, and since most funding is locked up in ongoing projects, new scientists in the United States over the past year have gotten almost nothing funded and are leaving the country in droves. 5-10 years from now when those projects reach the point of practical implementation, they'll be creating industry in some other country. So your perfect libertarian paradise is on its way!

If you are willing to unscrew two dozen little screws, the battery swap-out is actually pretty easy according to iFixit. Of course, the battery itself will cost you over $100 bucks new, and Apple only charges about $120 installed, so the only real reason to do it yourself is if you live far away from an Apple Store and don't trust a carrier service with your laptop.

Your point would be an excellent one if reality wasn't exactly opposite to every statement in your post.

And are these the same guys who worked on DC-X and DC-Y back in the day which also achieved Grasshopper's same milestones 20 years ago?

Simply put, because baryonic matter (ie. dust) radiates. This article would be titled, "Why our instruments are sensitive enough to detect all that dust that's affecting galaxies and superclusters rotation" if it was dust.

Here's a recent summary paper on the evidence for nonbaryonic dark matter. Dust has, alas, been hypothesized, tested, and rejected.