Well, if you read Machiavelli (or even Dune), that is exactly what is suggested. Invade a country, put a horrible despot in control of it. Let the despot kill the violent opposition and beat the populace into submission. Then, depose the despot, execute him publicly, say you had no idea what he was doing in your name, and lower taxes slightly. Even though taxes are still higher than they were before, people will still love you because you are better than the despot you deposed. Now, I don't think Christoforo the idiot is the Machiavellian genious who would come up with this plan, but wouldn't it be funny if he were?

Another thing to consider is that the iPad has some very good apps designed specifically for scientific paper reading. "Papers" on the iPad is not only an excellent pdf reader with good coverflow options, it will sort and arrange your papers by author, year, and journal. It directly searches public repositories of articles like web of science and google scholar and will directly import both from the web and from dropbox, eliminating the need to deal with iTunes.

First, IANAL. However, this is a common misconception. The constitution does not guarantee you free speech in all circumstances. It just guarantees that the Government itself will not make any laws that restrict your speech. Anyone else can restrict your speech in any way they see fit using whatever powers they may have. Your company can fire your if they don't like what they say. Your doctor can refuse to treat you. Your school can expel you (assuming it is a private school). Most especially, you are free to restrict your speech by voluntarily entering into a contract not to speak on certain issues. How else would NDAs work? To the best of my knowledge, the Bill of Rights (and most of the other amendments) limits only what actions the Government may take and does not inhibit the actions of individuals or groups such as corporations.

I'm not sure it's a troll exactly, though it probably wasn't phrased in a completely accurate manner. Since apple's move to Intel it has consistently taken longer to offer access to the newest processors than other hardware manufacturers. This is because apple has a philosophy of fewer hardware models that get refreshed on an anual basis, as opposed to Dell, HP, and the like which have no problem offering the newest chip the day after release. I think that TFS was simply commenting that it is interesting that good timing on the Macbook Pro refresh and an unintended supply chain error had conspired to make Apple the first out with the newest processor rather than having a delay of a few months which is more typical. If you read "new technology" to mean "new CPU technology" (I feel it is clear from context that they are talking about processor technology) then the statement is reasonably accurate. Admittedly, TFS could have been more clear. And yes, I know that "processor" and "CPU" are not necessarily synonymous, but I think the statement holds in either case.

Emacs is a beautiful and flexible piece of software capable of doing a great many things. And if you run vi from inside it it will be a good text editor.

I dunno. If CS people think that's what the big-O is then it explains a lot.