I want my computer to run slow. Please leave Ultimate Performance off, maybe insert some extra latency in a few places just because... This is hardly a new requirement. For the work I do, Windows has always been looked past because it couldn't get out of it's own way when running high-performance or near real time code. It will never do actual real time (Microsoft could make that, but it wouldn't be called Windows), but why has this "Ultra Extreme Actually Fast" mode been so impossible in the past?

Some (but not all) parts of the headline are mostly not entirely unlike parsable English

Past performance is not an indicator of future results.

How do you get it back out?

He states that the GPU is for number crunching, presumably with CUDA or OpenCL or some such. While he doesn't mention if video output is required, my gut tells me no - if the computer will be in the path of a water jet, ther operator likely won't want or need to be there.

You are correct, Verizon can do this leaglly (unless the FCC ever gets their act together), but not for the reason you mention. There is still a contract, with agreements about what services will be provided, and how much those services will cost. Unlimited data is one of those services. The "contract period" is simply the minimum length of time the contract will be in effect without the customer having to pay an early termination fee. If Verizon wants to change any terms of the service (throttling, no unlimited, etc) they can do so with 1 months notice to the customer (which they are doing, with about two months to go), regardless of the "contract period". If an ETF were applicable (which none are, since all unlimited plans are well over two years old at this point), then the customer could ditch the contract (and thus cell service) without paying the ETF. Now, just because they can do it doesn't mean that they should (customer satisfaction). But I'm sure they've done market research to suggest that they will get far more "shared data" plan conversions than they'll lose from upset unlimitted customers.

Oh, they have the individual permissions issue worked out - they accidentally released it through AOSP in ICS for a short time. Worked perfectly, you could disable any individual permission (and take your chances with apps crashing randomly), including the permissions that would let an app identify your phone for advertising use. Which is why they pulled the feature almost as soon as it got out - Google's buisness is ads, and anything that might upset their customers (hint, that's not the phone owner) is a bad thing.

The graphic at the top of the article indicates 10-100 nm. This is out in the UV, and would make a quite horrible wireless system. The article mentions terahertz, which would be 10-100 um. Still only useable over short distances, but much more likely.

I second this one, connected through it as I type. Works great, closest thing I've seen to "It Just Works(tm)" in the OpenWRT world. And it's reasonably fast to boot (and to boot...).
As to the folks saying it's slow or has limited range, there were some issues with the 10.03 firmwares early on, just normal development shakeout stuff. Running 10.03.1-RC4 on it now, works like a champ.

I've taught the toaster to feel regret!