On the contrary Virgin Media is not run by Branson and their service is awful.

What's the problem? Supporting old technology slows down the adoption of new technology for one but mainly it's the insanely massive security risks associated with XP.

But it might be a better crutch - AA only takes a small amount of CPU time compared to rendering 4x the area. Also MS does have 4x AA in the Xbox 360.

That's because small point & shoot cameras are crap, they have small apertures and wide angle lenses - this increases the focal plane quite a bit. This technology is for photographers where you may have a very small depth of field.

I don't think so - this technology significantly reduces the resolution and available light - these issues are only solvable by using a larger sensor, which is a problem since the industry is built around 35mm and 70mm formats.

The article mentions PMMA and resist for use in electron beam lithography, yet PMMA is THE resist used in e-beam.

This is wrong and right - a single layer of graphene has no gap and one can only be produced if it lies on an appropriate substrate (one that introduces an energy difference between the two different basis point within the graphene lattice). However bilayer graphene exerts a tunable band gap with the application of an electric field - essentially the conductive state is gate controlled, the problem at the moment is the on/off ratio which is being hampered by a number of things including the cleanness of the graphene and the size of the electric field you can apply. I can assure you it's very possible to make transistors from graphene - I've done it.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

An engineer spends years at university learning how to build a bridge, he learns every detail from the behaviour of concrete to load bearing of steel, in the end he gets his degree and builds bridges. A physicist spends years at university learning how to learn, in the end it only takes a small effort for him to learn bridge building.

Actually it is - if you have a fast hash algorithm it means attackers can easily hash a whole database, for example if they found a weakness in your system (e.g. you used the same salt for all your passwords) then he could very easily rehash his dictionary attacks with this new salt with a trivial amount of computing time.