<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 1:25 PM, samantha <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sjatkins@mac.com">sjatkins@mac.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
If it is unclear in the rest of the book why innovation is so crucially important then that lack would need addressing. But I doubt very much Max would miss that.</blockquote><div><br>He got it in the later parts. It's just, that specific phrasing - the claim that all of us want<br>
to protect our freedom to innovate technologically - sounded like something a reader<br>could easily take to dismiss the rest of the book unread. "Seeking out information that<br>confirms one's biases" and all that. (Yes, we all want things that logically result from<br>
technological innovation. Many people simultaneously want those fruits and claim to not<br>want to let people innovate, specifically rejecting the costs in societal disruption and<br>unknown potential harm. They hope and pray and believe there is a way to get the<br>
benefits without any cost, if they think about it at all. Since this dissonance is part of<br>what's being addressed, better phrasing might be called for.)<br></div></div><div style="visibility: hidden; display: inline;" id="avg_ls_inline_popup">
</div><style type="text/css">#avg_ls_inline_popup { position:absolute; z-index:9999; padding: 0px 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; width: 240px; overflow: hidden; word-wrap: break-word; color: black; font-size: 10px; text-align: left; line-height: 13px;}</style>