"An artificial market for underpowered devices has been created..."
The same could be said for netbooks. For about the same price as most mid-range netbooks, I could build a much better desktop with a much faster CPU, GPU, and much larger hard drive. Why do we need these underpowered PCs that can barely surf the web? For that matter, why do we need mobile devices that run applications? Why does my music player also take pictures and play movies? Why does my phone do more than just allow me to call people? The reason is we've come to expect these devices to improve and add more capabilities with every generation.
We used TI-83s when I was in high school nearly 2 decades ago, and they look/perform/cost the same as they do today. Every other electronic device (that I can think of anyway) has improved in those three categories since then. What makes calculators so special that they shouldn't ever be upgraded?
In fact, this is a math coprocessor revisited. Remember those?
Yes, those chips that handled floating-point operations so well that they eventually were integrated directly onto the CPU die itself; ie- 80386 CPU + 387 co-processor evolved into a single 486DX with integrated FPU.
Still, I don't see the why you're comparing them to GPUs... FPUs were small in comparison, even compared to early fixed-function rasterizers from the 90s; today GPUs are multi-billion-transistor chips with hundreds of programmable stream processors (with faster/higher bandwidth memory) that not only cover all of the rendering pipeline, but can do general-purpose computation as well. While small GPUs are getting integrated into future CPUs (AMD Fusion, Intel Sandy Bridge, etc), I'm doubtful discrete graphics will disappear in the way x86 math-coprocessors did, at least for the foreseeable future.
I support this point of view, although I think guns are worthless in close combat. What are you going to do, kick, stepback, pull a ninja-block, draw gun, fire right into the side of the temple? You won't reach the gun; the guy'll block (and then break) your arm unless you whip out some Budo or Pentjak Silat or something on his ass. Guns only work when they're pointed at someone; we need martial arts training.
You sound like you've either swallowed your sensei's bullshit, or watched too many martial arts films. I have had three years of Taekwondo and one year of Jujitsu training and even I'll argue that a firearm is useful in close quarters. Most gun encounters occur within 15 feet, which is about a second away from physical contact with the bad guy. Even 0-5 feet, the gun is invaluable, and can stop an adversary or at least allow you to escape. And if your adversary has a gun, the only thing to give you a fighting chance is another gun.
Real fighting is not like the movies. In real life, a 125 lb black belt can easily be overpowered by a 250 lb guy with very little combat training. Sorry, but there's little that technique and training can do to overcome an attacker twice your size and strength (unless they're terribly bad fighters), especially if they're armed. A gun is the best equalizer in those cases.
* Anybody else wonder what the hell they harvest on Tatooine? Like anything grows there.
I'm not going to say what in particular was wrong...
What, that he mistakingly used the wrong kind of fertilizer? That's not exactly uncommon knowledge.
Everyone knows you need ammonium-nitrate. Sheesh...
Love makes the world go 'round, with a little help from intrinsic angular momentum.