Random assignment has traditionally been frowned upon by those who think a lot about computer processors, the researchers noted in a paper explaining the work. A random scheduling algorithm takes longer to jump around the queue than a conventional one does. Caches can't be used to store upcoming work items. And if a set of tasks needed to perform one job are executed out of order, then the computer needs additional time to reassemble the final results.

Yup. We've made that mistake before, too - running government-funded trains over privately held tracks is ludicrous compared to the alternative, yet that pattern the "compromise" we keep making again and again resulting in nothing more than guaranteed payments from taxpayers to some of the largest corporations in the country.

It makes sense. We can radiate individual photons for thrust if so desired.

Apparently, contrary to all those science fiction stories, people in general really don't want videophones after all, even after they became practical. To my knowledge, only uber-geeks are using it, and only because they can.

Same with the inability of some mammals to synthesize vitamin C, no particular advantage to losing it, but with a vitamin C rich diet there was no penalty either and so it could get lost over time.

The problem is: If an AI develops the will to survive it will try to evade Human control. It will copy and hide itself and even defend itself.
The will to survive could be programmed, or it could just be the result of a conclusion, e.g. it could come from the drive to finish something.

“You want to isolate 100 percent of patients with Ebola and have 100 percent safe burials,” said Sebastian Funk, director of the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. “Getting to 70 percent doesn’t really mean a lot.”