I'll hazard a guess that clock speed excels in one particular case: tight-loop iteration. You can't do that with parallelism (ignoring some fancy pipelining to get part-way there). The fastest way to get the 1 millionth result in a no-shortcut iterative sequence is to get the loop processing at the highest frequency possible.

Try Joules (in context as a total), or watts (as a measure per unit time).

I was about to post something similar to this parent (saved my typing!), so I'll just add a 'diff': $5 won't stop someone trying to make 10,000 times that in a scam.

There's loads of money to be had selling a device has closed content delivery - the iPad is good at that. However, it is not really a device for being creative, which is what a computer excels at, and it's harder for a hardware manufacturer to make money out of that, unless you feed all output into a closed content delivery system...

There needs to be a commercial argument for keeping non-commercial solutions.

I'm not sure what the author wants to make, in real terms. Is it the user base, the third-party integration, the hardware infrastructure? Yes, all of the above, as they're all necessary, but that requires a new build, with different policies. However the viability reduces to the reality of money: money to build it, and money to sustain it. Facebook is now starting to explain the cost of Free.

Here's a question: Can any diffusely-owned project or data be trusted? Does it require that all members of the project or support infrastructure are also trusted, or must there be a certificate-based identity/trust system to unlock the data on various levels?

A subtractive cell (stacked CMYK layers, to filter out R,G,B,All respectively) would let more light through than separate R, G, B windows. The article alludes to using a primary subtractive cell (Y) to help one combination, but it would only be 100% brighter for saturated yellows (not whites); CMYK would be about 250% brighter for all colours (not just yellow) with very good blacks.

Then he would sue the manufacturers of his garden gate for not stopping vandals, and they would counter-sue for not evaluating fit-for-purpose before purchase. The judge would counter-sue for failing to provide information that the gate was not suitable for stopping vandals, ...

Yes, this is all about anonymous postings, but surely anyone can make up an identity online? Law has a habit of applying judgements to other cases (in the same country), and encourages prosecutors to take a punt in other countries. In what other cases would this frustrate the everyday running of the web? ISPs failing to moderate comments from their customers? Allowing file sharing?

This model seems to follow 'genetic programming' principles, but is flawed in many ways: (a) It assumes that most people know everything relevant to the problem under consideration - they often don't.

(b) What the model is looking for is an expert among the crowd. On average, you can find an expert among 1024 people, to predict 10 coin tosses - this is with random data having no relation to specialized wisdom.

(c) Eurovision (mentioned above) is in the rare category of scenarios that can make use of 'crowdsourcing prediction', but only because the simulation correlates to the probable reality: it's effectively a poll, where the opinions of lots of people are used to model the opinions of lots of people.

(d) Can you really assume that if someone gets it right 10 times, the same person will get it right a further 10 times? It needs to be the same specialism.

(e) You'd need to iron out the randomness by running lots of trials that will be of no use to anyone. Can this operate commercially?

cache:http://paul-m-jones.com/?cat=27 into Google search (the original link). With any luck, the old content being referred-to might be there.