Because most times Apple won't do repairs. Or the repair they are willing to do will cost more then the device is worth. Best example I know of is they will not repair a Macbook motherboard, they will only replace it for an obscene amount.

Not just that, the update was already up on r/savevideo before the original article was posted on /.

FPGA are closer to ASIC then CPU's. But an ASIC will still run much faster then FPGA programed to the same circuit as there is still all the logic connectors between the gates that the signals would need to propagate thru, not to mention that the gates are would be physically further apart. On a ASIC there are only the proper connections, and the gates much more optimal layout minimizing the distance the signals have travel.

Raw clock speed is raw clock speed, but at a certain point the resources needed to push the clock speed higher are not economical. The chip runs too hot and draws too much power. So adding extra cores makes more sense as the power demand will go up, more or less. linearly with processing power. It might even make sense to slow the default clock speed to be able to add more cores. Your clock speed will go down, but you processing speed, (ie # of instruction completed per second) will go up.

Yes there is some overhead in having to parallelize stuff, but even with that your still going to be ahead of the game.

Aliright I admit I used the wrong term.

But my point still stands, power consumption increases at a rate greater then linearly. Where as adding cores the power goes up linearly.

Raw Clock speed has been meaningless for the last few chip generations. And actually dropped a few gens ago. All for the sake of efficiency. The as speed goes up power consumption goes up exponentially. But the same works in reverse, by lowering speed a little bit you get a huge savings in power, which allows you to do stuff like add additional cores. So while raw speed goes down total computing power goes up. This just seems like more of the same.

Sadly any answer probably boils down to the fact that not enough people have been injured and/or died yet. Hang a few bodies around the problem and you can bet the government will start taking security on these devices much more seriously. Hang a few lawsuits on them and the companies might do something about it themselves.

Old movies? He's probobly been watching "Person of Interest" where this is the main plot right now.

hydrophobic / hydrophilic

Maybe not occupy, but as soon as week can exploit those bodies? yup, out the airlock it goes.

Exactly, re-direct all traffic to a page that states "You are infected, here's the fix, contact your ISP if you want to confirm this page is legitimate."

Bam, problem solved.

Most of that dust is probobly on the stationary part of the fans. The main idea for this heatsink is that the HEATSINK doesn't get as much dust on it. Take a look at most fans they get some dust on the blades, but it doesn't really build up over time, as compared to the dust that accumulates on the stationary fins of a standard heatsink.

In no way is this like a Boundary Drag Pump. It has blades, the defining characteristic of a Tesla pump is that it DOSEN'T have blades. Yes they both talk about the boundary layer effect, but the heat sink is trying to minimize it as it impeads heat transer to the air, while a tesla pump tries to maximize it as that is how the pump transfers motion to the liquid.