Methinks the W.H.O. should take a gander at http://xkcd.com/552/
(Heck, maybe BHG should too)
There's a lot of fun you can have with claims that assume correlation implies causation.
I remember a joke theory someone put together that had the same setup as the comic, but instead it compared the increase in global temperature to the decrease in the number of pirates (real life pirates, not software pirates), and stated that the decrease in pirates was causing global warming.
AvatarIII wrote:you are comparing old low end laptops with brandnew untouched premium hardback books, and they still only just have comparable prices
And you're still missing the point. The price is not the reason people cringe at the destruction of a book, and it's not the reason people don't feel the same visceral reaction to the destruction of a laptop.
It may be true that burning books is not comparable to holding the laptop the way Hat Guy is, but keep in mind where this argument started.
"I wanted to scream until I saw the title text. Seriously. That's almost worse than bending the spines of books backwards
Bending the spines, not burning the books. Bending the spine of a book, breaking the hinges of a laptop, scratching up the surface of a table, spilling red wine or something else that stains on a carpet or on clothing, cracking a window, etc. will all get a similar visceral reaction. You can still read the book, you can still get the data off the hard drive, you can still put things on the table, you can still walk on the carpet, you can still wear the clothes, you can still see out the window. But see, this logic is not good, because it implies that it is acceptable -- or at least not a big deal -- to do this type of damage. People like their things to be undamaged, even if they're still usable while damaged, and fixing each thing I listed is either difficult, expensive, or both.
"It's easy to forget what a sin is in the middle of a battlefield." "Opposite over hypotenuse, dipshit."