Rather than being a carefully considered weighing up of risk against benefit, I sense a revelling in the feeling of transgression - A sort of "drill baby drill" attitude.

Actually - The fact that anything more than a fringe minority would support such a person is the issue.

After WWII, there was a lot of ink spilt trying to examine the psyche of the German population, in order to understand what could cause a people to turn en masse in this way. The conclusions were often that there was in fact nothing special about the Germans. This could happen anywhere. But countries like the UK and the US didn't really take this to heart. There was a core belief that the rule abiding Germans could fall for this sort of thing, but the free-thinking English and Americans never would. There might be wacky radicals that pop up from time to time, but their ideas would lose out in the town square debate, and they could never win over a rational people.

User: I'd like you to turn off OneDrive after every update from now on, ok?
Agentic: Certainly. That is a very perceptive request. I will be sure to improve OneDrive during every update.
User: No, no. I asked you to *turn off* OneDrive!
Agentic: Of course! Turning off, and updating immediately. 5, 4, 3, 2, ...

Submitter hadleyburg here. I'm very grateful for all the helpful comments.

I'm just following up to say that I plan to go for an NEC T1175LAC.
Unfortunately this only seems to be available in Japan. The specific model/colour I want will be released on Dec 4. It costs about the same price as an entry level iPad, although it does have more storage.

A few follow-up notes:

• 
  Storage: A problem with the iPad is that models with more storage become pretty expensive, and you can't increase storage later. I suspect a large reason for people upgrading from an iPad is that they no longer have enough storage to perform an OS update.
• 
  ChromeOS: ChromeOS would also provide a pure Google ecosystem, and I have had an excellent experience with the Google Pixelbook Go. I wish that had continued this line.
• 
  Pixel Tablet: Yes - I was considering this. I still think it would be a good option, but I hesitate slightly because I have some doubts about Google's commitment to continuing this line of devices. Thanks mike805 and ufgrat.
• 
  Cheap tablets: There were a few suggestions about cheap Android tablets, but in my experience with Chromebooks I have come to feel that it is better to fork out a bit more to avoid low powered CPUs and other frustrating surprises.
• 
  Samsung/Lenovo: Lots of recommendations for these. They sound like good options. I partly decided to go for the NEC tablet because it seems equally good, but only seems to be available in Japan. I thought I'd give it a try.
• 
  Fire: If I understand correctly, the Fire doesn't fit as nicely into the Google ecosystem as and Android or ChromeOS tablet.
• 
  Raspad: I hadn't heard about this. Essentially a tablet kitset. It looks like it is aimed at kids, and it's a bit chunky, but very cool. Thanks FudRucker.
• 
  Bloatware: Thanks for the warnings. I'm crossing my fingers with the NEC tablet.
• 
  Why a tablet?: Octorian wonders what the use case is for tablets. I think it might be the portability within the house. It's slightly easier than a laptop for use at a dinging room table, or on a sofa. And for more passive use, where a keyboard is not needed, they fit well. My main use recently would be for video calls with family members in other countries.
  Shane A Leslie also explained how tablets can be very good with autistic children.

I understand your point about people being irrationally triggered by president Trump. But you would surely accept that it is not entirely without reason.

That would first be based on the assumption that nuclear weapons are morally defensible. Some think they are, but not everyone.

But I would suggest that there are other considerations.
1. If the US restarts nuclear weapons testing, that sends a signal to other nations. It was quite difficult to wind down nuclear testing at the end of last century. Are we sure that we want it all back on again?
2. Nuclear testing has a negative environmental impact - Even underground testing. We are less free-wheeling about environmental impact now than we were in the 1950s and '60s.

Colossus - The Forbin Project
A 1970 film, recommended for SF fans who like this sort of thing.

I think that someone like you who has built their own company (companies) is deserved of respect. There is quite a lot of risk involved, and I think it is reasonable to consider the profits as a sort of reward for taking on that risk. You also provide employment to a lot of people. I certainly tip my hat to you.

But I also think it is important to consider that in some situations a union is a force for good. In your situation a union may not be needed - The employees may be treated well, and even if they aren't, they may be able to leave and find work elsewhere. But that sort of competitive labour environment is not the case everywhere. Unions came about when employers had a lot of power over employees. They were treated like machines, and unceremoniously fired if they were injured or surplus to requirements. Employees had very little time off. The firm may have been in a monopoly position (wrt labour) meaning that an employee who lost their job would find it difficult to secure other employment.

I'm sure that your companies don't need unions, but as a company owner, I think it would be good to understand that unions do sometimes have a place.

The US has banned compulsory union membership (as part of the employment contract) in about half of the states. This is referred to as "right to work" legislation.
Compuslory union membership is now illegal in the UK (from some time in the late 1980s).

But although they are not as common these days, "closed shops" still exist.

I can understand your points.

I suppose it is much like a political party. If you join, you are to some extent announcing that you subscribe to the views of the party. In reality you are likely to agree with most of them, but take issue with some of them. If your views stray too far from those of the party, then you leave that party. With a union, that can mean having to leave your job. It can even mean having to leave the industry. Similar to how it is in politics, if you are seriously concerned about leaders going astray, you have to get involved.

But I sympathise with situations you mention, including that of your wife, and agree that unions are certainly not incapable of poor representation.

I suppose this is the cue for a Slashdot weigh in on capitalism vs socialism.

You know, I don't see why unions should be so triggering. In economic terms, "production" produces "economic rent". Firms use whatever power they have to maximise this (e.g. they may have a certain amount of monopoly power). This economic rent can be taken entirely by the firm, or be shared with the workers. When workers exercise power in their control (collective bargaining through a union), they can receive a bit more of this rent.

It sounds like a reasonable, and reasonably democratic set up.

Sure, you can dig up all the sins of unions, or for that matter the sins of firms exploiting workers, but the basic framework doesn't seem unfair to me. Perhaps gut-feel opposition comes with a instinctive personality type. Are you the sort of person who likes to work in a group, or are you the sort of person that prefers to be self-reliant.

Make Slashdot Great Again

The trouble with climate change is that its effects don't occur in the current quarter.

I'd argue that in many cases they have passively made that choice.

I also value personal choice and responsibility. If I started to put on weight, my first reaction would be to try to change my diet and exercise habits.

The point I want to make, is that this sort of personal willpower (or lack of it) is only a part of what makes a society obese.

If you live in Japan, and feel like having a beer, the menu is likely to offer edamame, or cucumber with miso as a side snack - healthier options than the typical beer establishment offers in the US. Likewise, if you live in Japan you are probably walking to and from the station each day, whereas in the US you are more likely to be sitting in your car the whole journey.

If I have a certain level of willpower, I am more likely to be obese if I live in the US, compared with Japan. Or to put it a different way, to fend off obesity in the US requires more willpower than it does in Japan.

So yes - personal choice and responsibility is vital, but if you want to address the problem of obesity in society, it will only take you so far.

I suppose a libertarian might take a more hardline personal responsibility approach and simply declare the obesity problem to be an appropriate outcome (given that everyone has the choice), and therefore not a problem that should be addressed...