Your answer turned out to be incorrect? Just change the question!
Can't tell if this is part of the sarcasm implied in the first sentence. Changing the question when the answer doesn't work pretty much is what science is.
still reorganize itself to pass messages quickly, efficiently, and automatically among any nodes that still had SOME path between them
Yeah, that was the design. The implementation falls a bit short, as any number of backhoes have proven over the years.
I'm inclined to agree with you in part: Both period and frequency are absolute measures and can be used reciprocally. However, "short" and "slow" are comparative, not absolute ("slow" does not mean "time over distance"). "Short" by itself is meaningless. If Bob is "half as short" as Ann, is Bob taller or shorter than Ann? Is Bob half Ann's height? Twice Ann's height? 150% of Ann's height? Without any additional information, it's up to the hearer's interpretation of what "half" of a comparative measure means, and all three absolute conclusions could be considered correct.
It's the same with "young," the misuse of which is gaining popularity when stating age (and really grates on my senses). "I'm 25 years young." No, you aren't. You're 25 years old. "Years old" (the two words together) are an absolute measure of the duration of someone/thing's life. "Years young" just doesn't mean anything at all.
To conclude, you can't have something "100 times less expensive" unless you know what "less expensive" means. If Solution B is a penny less expensive than Solution A, you can say Solution C is 100 times less expensive than A compared to B, and that would mean Solution C is $1 less expensive than A. But without a common reference, it's meaningless. 100 times what?
your question is in the area of: "you claim the sun is bright. show me your sources!!!"
No, his question is in the area of "you claim the sun illuminates this patch of ground better than this 12kW arc lamp. show me your sources!!!" Sure, the sun is bright. So is a 12kW arc lamp. Making the claim that one illuminates an area better than another requires supporting evidence in the form of luminous intensity measurements.
Since you put it another way, I will too:
"Water is wet." Sure, but is water wetter than alcohol? Ferrocene? Sodium laureth sulfate? His claim is that it's the best, which is, as the saying goes, an extraordinary claim which requires extraordinary evidence.
Nintendo's virtual console roms for the Wii being MD5 hash matches with well known rom dumps from the internet.
You say that as though you would expect them to differ. Of course they're matches--they're dumps of the same ROMs. Neither pirate nor Nintendo has any reason to twiddle bits in the image.
You're not fucking ee cummings.
Are you certain? Some people are really into dead poets...
Some people have a great ambition: to build something that will last, at least until they've finished building it.