'"Yes, cheating bots are annoying. And yes, they can be seen as a problem."
Can you write a worse, more confusing, AND grammatically incorrect summary?'

You are wrong. The sentence structure may be muddled, but the grammar is quite correct.

'Citigroup *is*, not *are*.'

Both are correct. It's a collective noun that can refer to a single entity or a group of individuals - cf. 'government' and 'team'.

The AP Stylebook is an American product, written by and for American journalists. Saying that the Internet should henceforth be 'internet' is a parochial decision without global authority.

In Britain the standard is set by the Oxford University Press, which has a rather longer and more illustrious history than the AP Stylebook. When the OUP and the Oxford English Dictionary declare that the word should not be capitalised, I shall accept their authority. Until then, it's the Internet for me.

"Apps are countable, so it's number not amount."

You're quite right, but the incorrect use of 'amount' has gathered such momentum that it's now unstoppable.

"You really have to wonder about a culture that refers to little girls as "it."

Gender (grammatical) has nothing to do with gender (sex), as any fule kno.

'It's two words, mkay?'

Originally two words, but in about the thirteenth century usage split between 'a while' and 'awhile'. Both mean much the same thing, but note -

awhile (adverb) = for a short time (e.g. he rested awhile)
a while (noun) = for some time (e.g. once in a while)

"140 characters is more than enough to express a complete thought!"

Indeed. Parkinson's Law: 'rubbish expands to fill the available space'.

"Why would he be considered more than an editor at best?"

Take the works of Shakespeare. Each play is, in its original version, copyright free; but you, as an editor, provide the modern reader with updated punctuation, consistent spelling, explanations of archaic words and expressions, historical notes on the characters and settings - and so on. What is copyrighted here is the contribution the editor has made - because he or she has created a new edition of the play.

Personally I think that the Anne Frank copyright renewal finagle stinks to high heaven - but the underlying principle is well-established, at least in English law.

I call absolute bullshit on this one. Language testing is about measuring a student's performance against one or more criteria. What Khan is apparently hoping to patent is a method for measuring the effectiveness of a piece of media, in this case video.

In the realm of text readability analysis this has a long history, perhaps the best-known technique being the Gunnar Fog Index, invented in 1952. The ubiquitous Cloze test, invented in the early fifties, was originally intended to measure and grade the reading difficulty of a piece of text.

So prior art aside, as far as I can make out Khan's product has nothing to do with the measurement of language skills.

"That's pretty sick.
heh, i got it"

Sikh and ye shall find.

"Are you going to ask a teenager if their pimples are real?"

No, because it would put them on the spot.

Perhaps the main reason the hovercraft never took off is a more prosaic one - limited ability to operate in bad weather and rough seas. I have happy memories of sitting in an ever-lengthening queue in an English Channel ferry port for the best part of a day because of high winds and wave heights.