> ...psychological disorders such as antisocial behaviour, narcissism...

I thought those were pre-requisites.

From a New Scientist article covering the research mentioned here - http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20827801.300-mental-muscle-six-ways-to-boost-your-brain.html (sorry, subscription required for full text, but you should get one anyway):
"Several studies have shown that simply exposing people to light improves performance on many cognitive tasks."
and
"In another study, volunteers had their brains scanned as they performed a short-term memory task while exposed to either violet, blue or green light. The scans revealed that after just a few seconds of light exposure an area of the brain stem known to play a role in alertness became more active (PLoS One, vol 2, p 1247). Blue light was the most potent. Similarly, in simple reaction tasks, exposure to blue light is more effective in sustaining cognitive performance than green light (Sleep, vol 29, p 161)."

Some of us not only tried, but succeeded. Among the APL systems on which I've worked, one was used by five traders who accounted for 1% of the volume of the NYSE and made a lot of money for the firm. Another was an engineering design system that far surpassed anything that was commercially available for years after it was created in APL.

Anyone who doesn't know what he's talking about, slam APL - which had features in the 1960s that are still in advance of contemporary languages. I'm sorry that your little brain can't deal with it. It remains a tremendously powerful tool - there are still four or five commercial vendors who sell a version of the language. It's a pity that so many programmers still act as if they are paid by the hour and choose large cumbersome tools when there are so many elegant and powerful ones available - not just APL, but this is the most frequently maligned by ignoramuses.

A more important issue is one of scapegoating. I have no doubt that he willfully did something wrong, thereby incurring unnecessary expense to the city and he should be punished. But how did his supervisors let him get in that situation? They, of course, have no threat of prosecution even though they allowed him to get in position to commit the abuse by failing to have policies in place to prevent it.

It's a bit like a rogue trader taking full blame when his management failed to adequately monitor and limit his positions.