This is nothing but thinly veiled Socialism.

True.

The free market always will provide a superior solution ... and probably already has.

False.

1) NEVER EVER try to build an editor in a structured language. Functional languages are a poor fit for procedural tasks.

Concrete examples, please. I've been using Haskell for a few years now, and I can't see the problem with "procedural" tasks. Especially when you don't define what that means.

3) The idea that you can build a provable system using a functional language is bat crap insane. In terms of proof it'll give you nothing that good unit tests wouldn't give you.

I suspect you (or your lecturer) encountered something like QuickCheck, which is indeed not more thorough than unit tests (but properties are much easier to write).

There are definitely techniques to truly prove correctness of software, which are based on dependently-typed functional languages like Coq, Agda and Idris. In these languages, the type system is so expressive that you can express theorems in it, and values of those types are proofs.

• have hinted that there's a very simple mathematical theory behind the purchase vs. usage of Steam games, or
• be systematically and deeply flawed.

Another native Dutch here. If you want to read poor Dutch, go read the shit HR writes.

First off, many Dutch are anglophiles: they think English sound really much cooler than their 'boring' mother tongue. People in HR are no exception. Many Dutch also think they read, write, speak and understand English really well. Few do. Even fewer don't have an accent thick enough to stop a bullet -- which is strange, given that the majority of movies, TV series and music we get here is anglophone, with a native or 'neutralized' accent. You'd think that people pick up on that. Well, no. It's really painful to hear our Prime Minister's English, not because it's sounds bad, but because the average Dutch person speaking English sounds like this. Again, people in HR are no exception. It's even worse with HR: they copy a lot of management speak, which is invariable chock full of English-sounding terms, most of them made up or literally translated from Dutch. So, TL;DR: HR prefers to speak English, but are too stupid to notice they can't.

Secondly, we have a linguistic phenomenon called "Engelse ziekte" (lit. 'English disease'): ignoring that Dutch is an agglutinative language, and forming nouns through juxtaposition (e.g. "*tomaten zaden" for 'tomato seeds') rather than agglutination ("tomatenzaden"). Formally, this results in ungrammatical Dutch, hinders fast reading comprehension ("zaden" isn't a verb, but many plural nouns and infinitive verbs both end in "-en"), and may even change the meaning of sentences. You'd think that HR people know their own language well enough to know this; well, in many cases, they don't. Another thing that seems rocket science to some native Dutch, especially the kind of people that end up in HR, is basic verb inflections. The "dt-probleem" (not knowing whether a verb ending in an alveolar stop needs to be written with "-t", "-d" or "-dt", even though the rules are very regular) is mostly cosmetic, but it is exactly the kind of thing that makes you look "uneducated". Guess what: it's hard to find a newspaper or website that has more than a dozen descriptions that don't make those mistakes. TL;DR: HR probably won't notice basic grammatical errors in Dutch, because they make those mistakes themselves.

(Nota bene: I may be a tiny bit cynical about how well the Dutch master their own language.)

1. You can "buy" Google Glass for one day only.
2. Anyone can "buy" Google Glass, provided that they live in the United States of America.

Counter-example: in League of Legends, harassment and complaints happen more often towards people in the same team than to people in the opposing team. That's because, in a way, inexperienced and unskilled team mates are 'opponents' too, by stealing kills, bounties and buffs, by not assisting the team member when they are being pursued, and by not understanding champion synergy, roles, and overall strategy, all things that can potentially cause the team as a whole and players individually to lose.

I can't speak for Grosseteste, who lived in an environment where coming out as a physicalist was pretty much suicide, but coming up with something like "resolution and composition" must come from the trust that similar things behave similarly. Combined with the fact that observations of similarity are based on observations of physical properties, it must have crossed his mind at some point that there may be nothing more than just the physical, since all else is irrelevant when trying to formulate the single set of natural laws which govern the universe.

Barely. Again, to call opinion polls valid measurements for the scientific method, you must agree that similar things behave similarly: you only need to choose the right boundaries for your black box (i.e. a good idea of what this 'similar' means) to analyze and predict someone's behaviour. That goes against the notion that there must always be something inside the black box (a consciousness, a soul, whatever) that doesn't obey a natural, universal law, which is AFAIK something you need to refute physicalism.