People still write malware for fun, there's just also lots of malware made to make money as well.

Like Stuxnet?

Stuxnet was not a virus designed to break random computers for "fun" (or "proof of concept"). It was a targeted weapon designed to break a specific place. Unless someone pays to cause the destruction, it's economically better for the malware authors people to create a inconspicuous botnet.

Imagine if it turns out, in the future, such a "specific place" runs on Samsung laptops.

I'm not sure what the point of this exercise is. If the virus is as sophisticated as stuxnet it will only brick the Samsung laptops at that location, and it will have to do so only after spreading.

All the replies seemed to dismiss the issue as not a problem, because who would want to brick a computer?!

I'm just trying to highlight the many problems that appear when computers can be maliciously (or even accidentally) bricked by regular software.

Okay, but you should pick a more likely threat instead of making a shark attack argument.

I'm unfamiliar with that phrase, but are you saying CIH couldn't have happened in 2013?

Sure it could. So make your argument about something like that, a widespread threat, instead of something that is very scary and widely reported in the media but also very rare, akin to the chance of dying from a shark bite.

That WAS the original argument.

Okay I was unclear, let me try this again. pilif made an argument about times changing that you have not countered. You need something like that but modern. Stuxnet is too different of a beast to support you.

At this point I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, if you're convinced this is not a risk for Samsung laptop owners.

It's some risk, I guess. But I was interested specifically in what you had to counter pilif's most recent post. I guess either I was too unclear or you don't have a counter.