Putting your hand in a "safety" table saw

[gungatim]

Yep. I've actually lost part of a finger, though it wasn't in a saw. It sucked then, and continues to **** 2 years later. Can't feel things, harder to dig change out of my pocket, have to play guitar differently.

Guy that owns it is a patent attorney, not some punk class action muckraker. And having sold a start up to a bigger company, I can see why he chose the route he did. Big companies in general need to be compelled to act, not many of them have foresight to bring out cool new products. I'm not saying I would have done things the way he did, but that I understand it after trying to license the technology for 2 years and continuously hitting brick walls.

the difference is, companies are compelled to act by the market. new products come about when there is a need or desire. the inventor found the market did not demand the product. he attempted to create awareness and therefore need/desire but the market still did not want it. at that point, you leave it alone until the market changes. instead, he attempted to force the market with legal pressure. Not every invention makes it to the mainstream market, some find a niche, some wither and die (at least for a period of time). I don't disrespect the guy, just disagree with the tactics he used (economic intervention)

that's not how a free market works. It's one thing for the gov to mandate safety in the workplace, quite another to mandate things for an individual at home. I would absolutely hate to see a cash for old 'arn program removing "unsafe" homeowner saws, woodworking machines, shop tools, etc. we've seen where that has gotten us with the other areas this has been tried.

 

[redmondjp]

the difference is, companies are compelled to act by the market. new products come about when there is a need or desire. the inventor found the market did not demand the product. he attempted to create awareness and therefore need/desire but the market still did not want it. at that point, you leave it alone until the market changes. instead, he attempted to force the market with legal pressure. Not every invention makes it to the mainstream market, some find a niche, some wither and die (at least for a period of time). I don't disrespect the guy, just disagree with the tactics he used (economic intervention)

that's not how a free market works. It's one thing for the gov to mandate safety in the workplace, quite another to mandate things for an individual at home. I would absolutely hate to see a cash for old 'arn program removing "unsafe" homeowner saws, woodworking machines, shop tools, etc. we've seen where that has gotten us with the other areas this has been tried.

You're killing me here! What free market? There is massive intervention via legal pressure everywhere you look (via big business lobbyists and government mandate). If Delta had invented SawStop, you had darn well better believe that their lobbyists would have been doing the exact same thing that the inventor has been doing, albeit with likely more success.

There are countless examples (usually in the name of safety) where we as consumers are forced to buy things whether we need to or not. New propane tanks, smoke detectors, Arc Fault circuit breakers, and so on. All so that the big businesses who make these things can make more money.

 

[gungatim]

You're killing me here! What free market? There is massive intervention via legal pressure everywhere you look (via big business lobbyists and government mandate). If Delta had invented SawStop, you had darn well better believe that their lobbyists would have been doing the exact same thing that the inventor has been doing, albeit with likely more success.

There are countless examples (usually in the name of safety) where we as consumers are forced to buy things whether we need to or not. New propane tanks, smoke detectors, Arc Fault circuit breakers, and so on. All so that the big businesses who make these things can make more money.

just because there are countless examples does not make it right. new propane tanks, et al. were not forced on us by big business, and the laws forcing them are not designed simply to make people money. it's about control, and regulation = power. If Delta had done the same thing, they would lose my business as well.

If it is that easy to get some regulation passed just for big businesses to make money, they'd all be profitable and we wouldn't need bankruptcy laws. Obviously reality is quite different. Flawed it may be, and corruption will always exist, but I don't have to support it, give in to it, or even accept it.

I'm out before the lock...

 

[ilovevocs]

I like to use a push stick to keep my hands clear of the blade. 20 years later can still count to 10 with my shoes on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[67King]

the difference is, companies are compelled to act by the market. new products come about when there is a need or desire. the inventor found the market did not demand the product. he attempted to create awareness and therefore need/desire but the market still did not want it. at that point, you leave it alone until the market changes. instead, he attempted to force the market with legal pressure. Not every invention makes it to the mainstream market, some find a niche, some wither and die (at least for a period of time). I don't disrespect the guy, just disagree with the tactics he used (economic intervention)

that's not how a free market works. It's one thing for the gov to mandate safety in the workplace, quite another to mandate things for an individual at home. I would absolutely hate to see a cash for old 'arn program removing "unsafe" homeowner saws, woodworking machines, shop tools, etc. we've seen where that has gotten us with the other areas this has been tried.

Oligopolies are not exactly indicative of a true free market, and if we're honest, that's what many new technologies face. As a consumer, I welcome new technologies, and oppose efforts to suppress them.....which is what happens wiht oligopolies.