You've seen Carrie Fisher lately, right?

You're assuming there will be only one pirate. If I were to make an ebook available, under the parent poster's idea I'd check to see whether there are others out there already, and then run the diff.

Display a prominent notice saying "we block cell phone service". The same as how facilities in Europe that use CCTV cameras must display a notice. Problem solved.

Every end-user computing product on the market today borrowed significantly from earlier innovators, who in turn often borrowed heavily from others before them.

My point about Apple is that they were not technologically revolutionary, but were the first to truly crack the mass market. And yes, I include Palm in this - I was a long term Palm user, starting with the Palm Pro - the Nokia Communicator, the Newton, and many others. The iPad is important because it's essentially commoditized the tablet.

There'll be other, better products and manufacturers. Android's a start. So is Surface, so is BB10. Their and iPad's successors will, however, be accepted because of the massive appeal of iPad. That's all.

That's a condemnation of Apple's methods, not of the tablet format itself.

The iPad was not technologically revolutionary - but it is hugely significant in that it's ingrained the idea of tablet computing in the mind of the average user vastly more than any product before it. It's essentially set the stage for Android and others to follow on.

They are tremendously useful for stargazing - e.g. green laser collimators are fantastic tools for pointing out celestial objects or aiming a telescope.

Also, long-distance cat annoying.

Hardware hackers can also pop down to the nearest gun shop, pick up a .30-06 hunting rifle, and start potting away at airplanes, injuring or killing the pilot, hitting a fuel line, or otherwise causing it to fall down go boom.

People generally don't because it's understood that (a) doing so is malicious and destructive, and (b) there are laws prohibiting it with very severe punishment as consequences.

There are a lot of things in this world that are potentially dangerous weapons, including high-powered lasers. Banning them isn't the answer, but making it very clear that they're dangerous and that you're not to treat them like toys definitely is.

How about we put the onus for not being an asshole on the people who could cause the damage in the first place, not on those who might (in addition to their passengers) become victims of it?

Lasers can cause eye damage or blind a pilot pretty immediately, without time to put on goggles.

This is a good verdict. Society works if people are not assholes to each other; when they start being assholes, you need laws and enforcement to motivate them not to be.

How many of those people are 14? Or grandparents-oh-look-sonny-I-got-you-a-game? And how many are slobs with your average consumer's short-term memory, though?

Oh, you mean 70 years ago, five years before North Korea started the Korean War?

Please tell the Germans they'd better announce the right for pre-emptive strikes on France in case that pesky Napoleon comes over the border again.

Empathy and calculated reason are not mutually exclusive.

I manage a pretty large team, and work in turn for a guy who is far better than I am - I tend toward "nice", whereas this guy is best described as "lawful neutral". He's punctiliously fair, weighs the needs of the company and the overall population of employees with those of the individuals, and while he will give people a chance, does not brook avoidable failure.

I am learning a shitload from the guy, but understand that he'd drop me at a moment's notice - and that is okay. He's completely transparent about this, not in a threatening way, just very matter-of-factly because it's what he needs to do to keep the organization running successfully. We all know this and in turn do our best.

It's not black or white - "nice" vs. "utilitarian". Proper balance is everything.

Then say "we're not letting this person present because the subject is off-topic" not "we're not letting this person present because of "

> And it would be really beneficial if people like you and geeks in general were exposed to them.

I'd love to, but they're stupid triggers. I have PTSD from dealing with stupid people all day long. I don't need triggering. It's insensitive and hurtful.

> while its heart is in the right place

One of the most dangerous creatures in human society is the well-meaning idiot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

You're missing the point. It's not about Christian or Muslim or Hindu or Buddhist or Jew or Pastafarian.

Every one of the major religions has murderous insane extremists who kill in the name of their interpretation of faith. It is unacceptable. The fact that there are many more insane crazy homicidal fucks who happen to be Muslim than there are those who happen to be Christian is as irrelevant as the tu quoque (among any number of other hilarious logical fallacies) tactic often used by apologists when incidents of Islamic terrorism are called out.