It was never my intention to be a slacker when it comes to Jury Duty, but I discovered the way to get a quick dismissal by either the prosecutors or defense attorneys when they're taking "juror resume's:" When they ask you questions related to the notion of "reasonable doubt," you discuss it in terms of "confidence level" and quantifiable probabilities. They don't like folks on juries who think in terms of probability.
How does this relate to the current topic? The discussion on water-cooling often turns on the probability of things like pump-failure, the probability that a leak will occur, etc. etc.
So, as I still plan to "get my feet wet" with custom-water-cooling during the next year, it is helpful to hear a veteran like AigoMorla give his opinion about water-pumps.
Another forum member had also given his take on the AiO coolers, suggesting the quality of AiO parts has improved -- particularly the waterblocks and pumps.
It's the nature of "uncertainty" or risk that often blows the worries about it out of proportion. And that's why that old NASA white-paper which proposed the MTBF for a heatpipe being a million years seems so profound.
Put it another way. If I could quantify the probabilities about "guilt" associated with a jury trial, and concluded that "I was 95% confident" the defendant was guilty, I wouldn't think the 5% residual is "reasonable doubt." And if there's some 5% chance that a pump will fail after X years of continuous use, that's not so significant either. Unfortunately, the only information we get would be an MTBF spec and an analysis of customer-reviews for Quality-Assurance content.
And -- no -- if you were a criminal defendant in a jury-trial -- you wouldn't want me as a juror . . . I suppose . . . .