JustSomeGuy1

22july2013 said:

Rowhammer is scarier than Spectre. A budget the size of one Space Shuttle might be able to get Rowhammer to work. Maybe someone has had it working for ten years already, and in 50 years we'll get to watch a documentary movie about it just like we now watch about the Engima breakers. 

It already works. And this paper makes it a lot easier, in practice.

Please remove the paragraph starting "Speculative execution typically works by using a memory order buffer". And maybe edit down some of the stuff after that. It's barely better than word salad, and to the extent you can derive meaning from it, it's wrong.

AppleInsider said:

Since we were taking these with us, we paired them with our iPhone though nearly any Bluetooth device wil work just fine including your Mac[...]

I'm having a very hard time believing this. Did you actually try this with something like Skype or FaceTime? I have never seen a bluetooth device work for both audio in and out simultaneously on the Mac. (And I've tested a bunch, under many versions of MacOS and several different models.)

strangenoises said:

What about sitting it on top of a bag of frozen peas? ;-) Or, productized, some kit that replaces the base and pushes cold air up into the system? I know I know, I'm pretty sure the cost/benefit analysis of any such "cooling base" product would never work out.

DuhSesame said:

According to the infamous block diagram from iMac Pro, that T2 uses two x4 for communicating each Flash module, which also has eight NAND chips total.  Unlike RAID 0 where two SSD are connected in series, T2 works more like a dual-channel memory that connects them in parallel.

If you imagine that that improves SSD performance... well it does, a little bit, but not by much. Performance is still limited by the x4 interface to the PCH, and beyond that by the DMI to the CPU (which at least isn't much of a further bottleneck, except for wifi/bluetooth). But your point is wrong in any case, as SSDs are never connected "in series". SATA doesn't work that way. (Well, external ones daisy-chained on a single Thunderbolt link would be... which is why nobody would put them in a RAID 0.)

Also, looks like T2 technically is a chipset as well, so no need for an Intel PCH, one less bridge from NAND to the processor.

Reading comprehension FTW? Look at that diagram you posted. The PCH is there. The T2 acts not as a PCH, but rather like (or inclusive of the functionality of) a Silicon Motion or Phison SSD controller.
The T2 can't act as a PCH as it doesn't have a DMI interface, nor a whole bunch of other stuff. I expect that Apple could do that it if wanted to, except I doubt that Intel is willing to provide enough technical info to implement it. Also, the interfaces off a PCH are well-understood and independent of CPU generations, which may not be the case for DMI. Even if it is, they'd have to wait for specs when the generation changes, which would put them even further behind competitors who use Intel's PCH.

So that means the 15" does have a lot of advantage compared to a single M.2 laptop and on par with two M.2 in RAID 0.

Any advantage doesn't stem from more available bandwidth (they're both, in the end, limited to sharing a single DMI with everything else except video). It comes from a better controller, better flash management, etc.
In fact, compared with a desktop system using a HEDT processor (or an AMD Zen), the desktop's flash RAID-0 will have a significant bandwidth advantage, since it will likely be coming off two x4 links directly on the processor itself, *not* the PCH.

Speaking of the RAM, however, I believe it's only single-channel since now a SO-DIMM is able to provide a 32GiB total.

Also wrong. SO-DIMMs are irrelevant to the MBP, in which the RAM chips are soldered directly to the motherboard.