should I, or shouldn't I?

As I ponder the impending weekend, and wonder what to contribute to the blogosphere (do we really need more blogogarbage?), I realise there are too many candidate topics to devote space to (or not):

• should I comment on the Hauser affair, or not? [the Office of Research Integrity finally published their findings]. There's not much more to say, really. It's all there, in that report.
• should I be impressed by the new iPhone 5, or not? What impresses me more is how much of the phone's hardware was 'leaked' ahead of time. This said, I am impressed by the one feature that no one had anticipated - it's 20% lighter than its predecessor. And I find it a personal tragedy that whereas the iPhone can lose weight, I cannot.
• should I buy yet another (this time, cheap) watch, or is that incompatible with contributing to Apple's cash hoard when I succumb to my better instincts and buy the iPhone 5? (answer: yes, totally incompatible, especially seeing as 20% lighter doesn't translate into 20% cheaper).
• should I think about moving to Riva del Garda, my new favoritest destination in Italy? One can dream...
• should I work harder to get someone who is exceedingly rich to give me a whole pile of money to start up my own research institute? Probably, it'd be a help if I actually knew anyone who was exceedingly rich (or, alternatively, if anyone exceedingly rich knew me. I'm not fussy, it could work either way). When I advertised for an iOS developer on these very pages, it worked. So maybe I should advertise for a super-rich philanthropist who would like to name an Institute after themselves (message to Matt: nothing ventured, nothing gained! message to rich philanthropist: It worked for Trump, Eiffel, and Gherkin; this could work for you too).