If the target market is defined as casuals, that do not care that much about graphics and just want the cheap entry level, but fun gaming console, then why would those people buy an upgraded Wii?
The Wii sold a lot of consoles, so I'll assume this target demographic mostly already owns a Wii.

What does the upgrade offer these Wii owners? Better graphics? But we just defined graphics as not important.

The way I see it, the only really important upgrade in graphics is the one that makes it look acceptable on the current standard of fullHD TVs.
And this seems to be a problem while maintaining super cheap.

This is true, but it would also mean Nintendo would go the way of Sega and become a Games Company only.
Some of their hardware platforms, mostly handheld, seem to be still doing fine.

This would usually happen in (microcontroller-)hardware, not in code:
a hardware counter (running on a specified timebase) and a hardware interupt.

The code which would be in every watch would be the one for loading the counter, but it would not be the same in every watch, as it would differ depending on clock frequency and controller used.

That incredibly naive calculation only adds up if cycling was for some reason the only physical activity a human could undertake.
Which as you might know, is not the case and anyone giving up cycling because of the helmets can just switch to any other physical activity.

The problem lies in the name 'UNIverse'.
You can not name something universe and then have something next to it.

'That close'?
I skimmed the article and nowhere does it say how big this area would be.
If it is supposed to counter listening in with spy antennas and drones, then it must be quite big.

'humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time'?
If this is really how they presented the question, then I dare say that a good amount of those 33% did not understand what was being asked here.
Someone who has no preference on the topic, or in science in general, would not necessarily make the connection to evolution, or even biology with such an abstract wording.

Assuming that the OS in question is often Microsoft Windows, what makes you think a virus/malware is required in order for the NSA to compromise it?

This is about communication, so yes, you are forced to use something that the other side also uses. Because communication involves at least two people.

Sure, the UNIX nerd from 1980 can sit alone with his box and hack away, so all is fine. Typical slashdot reaction.

Too bad a single setup of meta material typically only works for a very specific wavelength.
So, it could be helpful with applications using a defined wavelength (for example soundproofing an array of many ultrasonic transcievers from each other to reduce interference), but it won't mask you from a wide array of sounds.

They used a camera.

I always thought this was a very bad idea.

Sure, it may protect him from those who do not want the information released.

But for those wo do want it released, they might feel motivated to force it...

Oh yeah?
I pronounce howling and rolling the same!
Your move.

You are joking, but that is pretty much what I'd expect from a working voice command interface (minus the misunderstandings!):
To be able to make conversation about the narrow field of $device_purpose.

So yes, a voice operated radio should be able to tell me what radio station I am listening to.
And it should understand common keywords that have to do with music, news, sound and such things.

If the system needs clarification and this requires the driver to inspect the screen, isn't that a problem with the implementation?

Clarification should be requested and should be given in voice alone.

Anything else defeats the purpose of the voice interface, doesn't it?