just found the "Daruino" pages - Google had been not-so-helpfully redirecting me to a search for "Arduino", assuming "Daruino" was a typo. Perhaps a more unique name would improve your searchability?
Your 28-DIP plug-in board seems like a great place to start. It's a useful gizmo in its own right, as an ARM-breadboarding tool, but the "just swap this in to make your Arduino run faster" angle is a great gimmick. I would definitely buy this, if only to play with it.
What scale of manufacturing do you have in mind? If I decide to order fifty and want them in two weeks, is that likely to be possible?
any way to turn your designers into promoters? some kind of bizmodel remiz of the standard croudsource--->you--->client model, to provide a feedback loop or lead generator?
I would buy clothing that was utility oriented with high quality, maybe with special tech oriented features, but not if it had "HACKER" plastered all over it.... A logo on the tag would not be obtrusive.
While I Agree with giraffe in principle, there is certainly a distinction, as there are people who are "disabled" due to the nature of their disabilities, so in this way it is fundamentally different from a racial slur, insofar as it reflects a matter of degree.
Also, by definition, "having a disability" implies being "disabled" in some degree.
That said, calling all people with disabilities categorically "disabled", while lexically and logically correct, does carry a clearly inaccurate and prejudicial -implication- that a person with a disability is somehow -less capable-. In this, giraffe is correct, that the use of "disabled" in this way can easily convey an inaccurate connotation of reduced capability, an thus its usage in this way is both unenlightened and potentially prejudicial - but I could hardly put it into the same category as a racial slur, which is clearly intended to diminish or marginalize.
Most of us are "disabled" to some degree (i.e. there's some normal ability which we completely suck at) but physical disabilities are more obvious and striking to the casual observer so it's easy and rather lazy for people to think "he's disabled and I'm not". Whether or not the intention is there, this still diminishes and marginalizes the person with a physical disability.
> , an thus its usage in this way is both unenlightened and potentially prejudicial - but I could hardly put it into the same category as a racial slur, which is clearly intended to diminish or marginalize.
regardless of the designers intention, it is nonetheless a potential side effect that such an extension might open up play to a wider audience, including people with varying levels of ability or impairments.
