I have to self-reply to this since a mod decided this should be tagged offtopic. NEWSFLASH: that's a quote from the tumblr you dumblr mod!

Also in the day of the LORD’s house, all the words of Alan Perlis, “Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon.”

For phones: www.gsmarena.com (great device overviews, specs and reviews), www.phonearena.com.

For PC components/misc: www.anandtech.com;

For tablets: all of above and also www.engadget.com, www.techcrunch.com, popular newspapers;

For laptops: www.notebookreview.com, www.notebookcheck.net for amazingly up2date CPU/GPU benchmark lists;

For professional software: anywhere but developer-affiliated websites

So true, yet so moot. Let me use numbering to address some key discrepancies on your otherwise totally intuitive, yet irrelevant arguments:

1. 1. You just discredited a system that has been successful protecting the majority of internet-bound critical use cases for years now. So I'm assuming you do absolutely no banking or social networking tasks on the WWW as you do not deem them safe enough?
2. 2. You now tell me you perform such use-cases through TOR. Too bad you just discredited TOR with that weakest link of trust argument. But you are right on that one, according to the Snowden leaks and Silk Road events, it is also unsafe. So will be Bitcoin eventually.
3. 3. A physical, "meat space" CA agreement is not going to solve all our problems, cuz' every sysop did not just gain immunity to social engineering. amiwrong? Physical CAs are definitely trustworthy because they don't abuse power either. Sure thing...

There is no such thing as perfect security, or perfect anything. There is good enough (for as long as it is deemed like that), and HTTPS enforcing is definitely BETTER than plain-text for now and forever. This is not like the Chrome "no keyring/no master password" argument: you do get bullet-proof security by mediated access, not nuke-proof, yet not everyone has nukes. That's why people bought kevlar+helmet on Counter-Strike.

So, without further metaphors: STOP CRITICIZING AN IMPROVEMENT

So this must be how Chinese smartphone manufacturers are sniffing cell data...

The real deal here is you are purchasing an APU for roughly less than half the price when compared to a mid-range Intel & discrete graphics solution, and getting double the performance. Apple knows this is the way to go for price-performance and that is why the new entry-level 15' MBPs lost discrete GPU. OEMs like Apple are forcing Intel to catch up with integrated GPU technology. It's all about trade-offs: you place a less performing GPU in the same die as the CPU in order to get the best possible memory interface. While you won't reach enthusiast or prossumer performance levels without adding a high end GPU, you will definitely target the common user market.

To me, that's something out of COD: Black Ops 2. Right before I see some stoners get shot to the sound of Skrillex.

Chinese and indian power companies could and did rely on US financing before, and now they won't be able to. New restrictions mean they will be forced to get more such big-ass loans from unrestricted sources, such as local banks or even state-owned banks. This effectively reduces such country's capacity for development, but in the long run might even be beneficial as interests circulating internally. Only time can tell.

Give me 10-year worth of the yearly extra spending on those "clean" alternatives and I will create a society-proof system that guara-f*ckin-tees no nuclear disaster will ever happen. With roughly a fraction of the predicted sum, measures such as the ones below are trivially attainable:

• - Provide government co-funding for implementation of nuclear plants when it's not particularly lucrative for the project execution bidder
• - Creation of an independent, hybrid nuclear energy committee/military/police body with simultaneous legislative, judicial and executive powers (think Judge Dredd with benefits)
• - Effectively enable the death-penalty to anyone that threatens, to a certain degree, nuclear energy-related critical regulation;

• ... and, of course...

• - Lobby the current government for the previous measures. And with that money, you can be sure even that one about death-penalty would pass, they already have death-penalty there

IMO South Korea is just, like many nations before it, admitting it CAN'T PREVENT CORRUPTION INSIDE ITS OWN SOCIO-CULTURAL BACKGROUND, and throwing the towel is usually the better option. Except in a scenario where the trade-off is going back 100 years, multiplying national the energy bill by 10 and the certainty that the environment will be polluted (as opposed to the casual, totally avoidable nuclear disaster).