Showing my age here, but when I was in high school, I did the teaching. Mostly to fellow students, but I did have two of the math & physics teachers in my "class" off and on. I taught Pascal on an Apple II. A little later, the high school down the road from mine actually set up proper programming classes (teaching Basic on Commodore computers). A bunch of work colleagues who are about my own age had similar experiences -- few high schools were set up to teach anything about computers at the time, so the nerds amongst us got to see the "other side" of teaching.
Which would be consistent with the iPhone doing very well in European countries where either the carrier was better then AT&T, or where there was a choice of carriers.
Could be the iPhone carrier -- for the longest time, there was only AT&T, and I know many people who really wanted an iPhone but refused to get it via AT&T. Some of them picked an Android phone instead.
For the iPad, choice of cellular carrier may not be that important (different usage model), which might explain why people aren't looking that hard for alternatives.
If it requires software changes that are not 100% automated, then this won't fly. Programmers have a hard enough time writing sequential programs, let alone multithreaded ones. Now they're supposed to also foresee and check hardware errors? I think not.
I note that the entire idea hinges on the s/w component, yet the article hides the complexity under the harmless-sounding term "robustification".
Another idea from the ivory towers that is good at generating papers, but not actual machines. IMHO.
Compare this with an atheist who might believe that life is futile, fleeting, and nothing they do matters in the long run... they might be more accepting and complacent.
Now just what makes you believe that atheists think life is futile? That's a pretty bigoted view...