With all due respect. 99.9999% quality says that out of one million
tries, you get 1 catastrophic (on the order of a sawstop misfire)
failure, not one in ten-thousand as you state. Right now, I NEVER,
EVER expect my current tablesaw to suddenly stop and mangle it's own
blade and be generally unavailable for an uncertain amount of time.
With the current SAWSTOP I am certain the chances are much better than
1 in a million of a misfire.
I consider myself a modestly careful woodworker. If I get that funny
feeling in my gut. I will stop and take an extra couple of hours to
make a jig for safety sake. I value my digits more than my time,
because my real job requires them, and I don't have Lloyds insurance to
feed my family if I can't work.
What I am saying is that I am willing to go from NEVER EVER, to perhaps
1 chance in a million of having a mangled blade. That is all
contingent that this thing truely does what it implies it will do. I
don't think it has been tested on live fingers, in every possible
working condition (only on chickens and hotdogs). It's certainly not as
hard as testing nukes, but it's another one of those inventions you
can't really truely 'test' in the lab (at least without human rights
I also question the ethics of an inventer who goes from: "this
technology will save your fingers", to: "the goverment needs to mandate
this because I say it's safe".