I'm skeptical since there doesn't seem to be an actual patent application

The Labor party lost and Rudd has subsequently quit as a Member of Parliament

I used to live with an Optus cable technician and the Telstra and Optus networks are not Fibre to the Home. They are Hybrid Fibre-Coaxial networks, so fibre to a node point and then coaxial to the homes that node services, with only a few nodes per suburb. It's still better than ADSL but the copper component still limits the overall speeds.

All the press releases aren't particularly clear, but it seems the next iteration will have 4 processor nodes per cartridge which should make it more feasible for creating HPC.

One of the services that you can buy from a hosting company is your own dedicated physical server, this will allow them to sell that service cheaper than a Xeon server, but still marked up higher than a virtual.

1800 threads isn't particularly impressive in an entire rack considering filling the same rack space with blade servers you can easily get over 2000 threads.

It looks like a decent option for hosting companies to sell dedicated web servers to people, or internally for a company that is running virtual desktops

Someone at Phoronix really needs to learn basic math. The Chassis is 4.3U and hold 45 of these Moonshot servers, so a 47U rack could fit 10 chassis' for a total of 450 servers.

I'll counter with Daikatana and Duke Nukem Forever

The request would be closer to "Hi, this is Bill. You have an account at Bank of America with account number 5551212 , what's your name, address, date of birth and social security number?"

The android equivalent is Vlingo, providing your phone has at least Android 2.1

Protons. Electrons have no appreciable mass. But it would be easier to add protons to iridium to make gold.

I looked at the numbers that were used for those graphs and it's incredibly misleading. It cherry picks data to make it look like Samsung has a vastly higher marketing expenditure than other companies. The comparisons are also against companies that are really only in a few markets vs the nine that Samsung Electronics are involved in.
Based on the 2011 annual reports.
- Samsung lists $2.9 billion for advertising expenses and $4.5 billion on Sales promotion expenses. (total $7.4 billion)
- Coca Cola lists $3.2 billion for advertising expenses and $5.8 billion for Promotions and Marketing programs (total $9 billion)
- While Apple list $0.93 billion for advertising expenses, that is the only expense they give a value for in their SG&A of $7.6 billion which includes retail costs, marketing, professional services, advertising and "other".

All that data shows is that everyone else hides their actual marketing expenditure better.