Given these kind of units are mass produced, I expect the margin your employer would earn on this $100 component to be much more related to the per-unit manufacturing cost than engineering costs. Formal verification of such a component can not be so costly that it can't be justified, once you spread such a cost over hundreds of thousands of units.

Wrong, it is much, much worse than that.

Imagine a body of scholars continuously producing wrong hypotheses. They test all of them. Your teacher correctly pointed that one in twenty will have a p-value > 0.05. But they write papers only off these! In such a scenario, 100% of the papers are wrong.

In other words, this 5% chance of a paper being bullshit is only a lower bound.

Game theory allows for derivation of optimal strategies, that is, strategies that maximize winnings. Depending on the game, GT yields little more than formalization of a game that can be beat using a "common sense approach", but sometimes counter-intuitive strategies are dominant, for example burning your ships.

The most intelligent person in the world would not stand a chance versus an experienced, serious chess aficionado. Being good at chess not only requires raw intelligence, but also strategic and tactical insights that just can't be developed on the fly no matter how intelligent you are, and especially not during a speed chess match.

Reminds me of the story of world-class poker player Tom Dwan (who has won millions at poker and is likely very intelligent) losing > $50k in misjudging his chances of beating chess International Master Greg Shahade, who was starting the game down a rook (an insurmountable difference when players have remotely similar skill).

Because many vaccines do not give you protection with 100% probability, but they make enough % of the population immune so that a virus is prevented from spreading. People who avoid taking vaccines are hurting everyone who's not immunized by the vaccine by providing more chances for a virus to spread. So not only you are hurting yourself, but also many others. Hence the state needs to control this particular flavor of idiocy as much as it needs to prevent drunk driving.

If he is found innocent they can simply burn the hash.

Optionally.

Actually, even if you can distinguish, is no way to prevent any host of the Internet from sending traffic to you. If you gather enough upstream bandwidth, you can clog any pipe you want. Some research works have proposed ways to amend this, for example this.

How is that moderated funny?

Usually when a company buys a start-up they make sure a non-compete clause is included in the terms of the acquisition to avoid this. The "make another DB" part, I mean.

Does this protection also apply to visiting foreigners, or are only Americans protected by this?

Popular Youtube videos. Or dropbox -- their main costs are probably in bandwidth and storage, and they can push the (de)compression tasks to clients so it's free lunch.

I disagree. The practical utility is a function of the number of downloads you get per compression operation, the cost of CPU time, and the amount of money that can be saved in bandwidth reduction. I can see how this can be an improvement to serve static content. For example, assuming browsers incorporate the capability to decompress it, lowering the bandwidth of Youtube by ~3% is an achievement.