Fallout Shelter - comments from the public

Feedback on Fallout Shelter™

A very good idea. Unfortunately I think the majority of people who see this product won't be convinced to buy it until there is a big flash in the sky! I think you are going to need some good marketing. Good luck, I hope this pays off for you. from England

I think you will get a good response from the survivalists and in general hopefully likewise with the more rational folks out there. Unfortunately I would have to agree in part with the view that the press will play this with a decidedly "DoomSayer" slant. Although I think the view that "invocation indicates defeat," could be easily swung towards "invocation indicates that even in the event of nuclear attack, We the people will still fight and survive." Again I wish you luck. I think it is all in the marketing and you have a serious PR challenge ahead.

I don't even know for sure where to begin in explaining why I find the product repulsive. Perhaps the biggest one is the fact that there are news headlines regarding terrorist attacks next to the product info. Then there is the fact that, even though there are a couple of sentences to the contrary, the copy tends to sell itself as a way of protecting one's friends/family/community. I wonder if anyone at unreasonable took the time to think of what happens to wired and wireless communications during a nuclear incident. I also wonder if people would be pulling out their Palms during said incident. I could go on and on and on.

The headlines are not about terrorist attacks. They are news about all nuclear hazards, be they from unsafe nuclear reactors, transport of nuclear waste, poor security at military installations, terrorists, or nations with existing or planned nuclear arsenals. Good news is reported, when it occurs. The headlines are provided as a service to our customers who want to stay on top of pertinent developments.

As early as the second paragraph of the main product page, we make it clear that electronics would be disrupted. On the effects page, we say that Fallout Shelter reports on both the distance affected by EMP and the duration of radio disruption.

Similarly, the point is made several times that Fallout Shelter is intended to be used pre-attack.

That said, there is also great value in a product intended for post-attack use, assuming the user has protected their computer from EMP. (Not hard to do; we're putting together an explanation.) If you have taken shelter, there are life-or-death questions to answer: Is it safer to stay or leave? If you stay, how long can you safely go out to bring in vital supplies or help someone outside and injured?

The answers will change hour-to-hour, depending the protection level provided where you are, the decay rate of outside radiation, whether the air you're breathing is replenished, etc., and will require additional equipment, such as dosimeters or survey meters.

Airplane pilots are expected to know how to calculate fuel consumption and navigation problems on paper. Nonetheless, they often use specialized software and flight computers as time-savers, knowing they can fall back on manual methods if the computers fail. Similarly, someone with you should know how to perform radiological calculations. Bruce Clayton's book Fallout Survival is good training. But our post-attack product (in the works) will save time and may provide additional information that wouldn't be feasible to determine manually.

I like the product. I think you should put together a press release for media (TV, newspapers, radio) as well as to relevant lobbying groups and think tanks....those against it are actually the most ignorant. Don't sweat over it.

Prey on people's fears! And, just when they think they have the products to make them safe, sell 'em something else!

Preying on fears is never a good thing, but if people have raised their hands saying I buy this type of stuff, and the product you are selling has value — then sell it to them.

Prey on people's fears — Sounds like Symantec and McAffee to me.

Exactly. There are real hazards in life, and there are many respected products and services that purport to help you deal with them, from the local health club to AAA.

I hope that the real product is not a Palm program that actually purports to help protect you and your family from nuclear attack. That would be a stupid product as well as a sickening one.

In the event of an attack the product is probably worthless unless either your Palm is EMP hardened or you are far enough away to need little advice besides not going toward the blast and paying attention to prevailing winds, etc....Even the most dedicated nerd is not likely to be plopped down on the sidewalk poking at his Palm at such a time.

See "Broken Arrow"? Electromagnetic Frequency Pulse, copters fall down! Unreasonable Product go bust!

See answer above.

Your fallout shelter is a good idea for an application... congrats... hope you make some money on it. Whenever I consider moving to or visiting somewhere, the 'safety' question inevitably crosses my mind. So, even though the subject is depressing to contemplate, it is relevant. from Ottawa, Ontario

Things like talking about being sure to look at the mushroom cloud if one safely can because it is so beautiful are WAY over the top.

Perhaps. But it is true, though. For example, Brigadier General Thomas F. Farrell described the first explosion thus:

The lighting effects beggared description. The whole country was lighted by a searing light with the intensity many times that of the midday sun. It was golden, purple, violet, gray, and blue. It lighted every peak, crevasse and ridge of the nearby mountain range with a clarity and beauty that cannot be described but must be seen to be imagined. It was that beauty the great poets dream about but describe most poorly and inadequately.

Major General Leslie Groves, who was in charge of the Manhattan Project, wrote, "The feeling of the entire assembly, even the uninitiated, was of profound awe." That the effects are horrifying doesn't make the cloud any less remarkable.

Um... if the product is inaccurate, and people have based at least a portion of their actions on it, and the world as they know it is destroyed, don't you think it would be a little too late to report a "defect"?

Customers may detect a bug prior to an attack, giving us a chance to fix it. And since the lethal zone around ground zero is relatively small, the odds are that customers will survive to report the bug, although presumably they would have other, more pressing, concerns.

"The world as they know it" would no more be destroyed for someone who has survived an isolated nuclear burst any more than it was destroyed by the 9/11 attacks or by Hurricane Hugo.

american media is going to run your product into the ground (or not publicize). this product would /perhaps/ sell in israel or some other active theatre. very few people in the united states are going to accept your product for internal-use because its invocation indicates defeat. it also parlays us into a worldstate that we do not want to be in. it is a device that says "we've given up; but at least we have real-time data on the decay, and i can carry it around in my pda if i want".

Using Fallout Shelter doesn't indicate defeat, just as finding out your triglycerides level doesn't indicate that you've resigned yourself to cardiovascular disease. Nuclear threat preparations may fail, just as dietary changes and exercise may not save you from a heart attack. But it may help. And in both cases, you may find that your risk level is low, and no precautions are called for.

The Plus side, is that the buyers of this software form a really good list of Paranoid Morons, who are best removed from society by the guys with Black Helicopters.

One is a paranoid moron to be concerned about the possibility of a nuclear attack from terrorists or 'rogue' nations, and want to do something about it? So you believe there's a conspiracy of the media, the military, the CIA, the White House, and Congress?

I am supportive of the product/concept as i think people are entitled to decide all the feasible resources available to them to make more informed decisions, protect their families etc... if you want to regard this as fearware, than you are just being close-minded to possible ways of protecting yourself in an event of such disaster.

I don't think that anyone would argue against mechanisms to ease issues during a disaster... in fact, one of my ventures does exactly that. The difference is that unreasonable.com insists on pandering to a particular disaster scenario... one that scares the living shit out of every single person on the planet. I have serious doubts as to any benefits of such a "niche" product. If they marketed it as a means of being in contact with friends and family in the event of an attack and got rid of the "doomsday is coming, so ya better buy our product" marketing, I would change my mind.

We don't believe that "doomsday" is coming, because we don't believe that a nuclear attack is doomsday. We chose to focus on the nuclear threat because although the Bush administration is treating the threat seriously, no effort is going into informing or assisting individuals or communities.

I agree that a lot of the language on the site is very sensational, and the product obviously is trying to capitalize on the worst kind of fear. I think I agree with some of the others who've implied that the site dramatically misrepresents the risk. But, I suppose, that's part of salesmanship. It just feels less tasteful when we're talking about the apocalypse. Forgive me, but a lot of the site seems like it stepped out of a 1950's public service announcement (insert kids under desk video here.) The danger of the type of broad-scale nuclear attack for which this is designed is *extremely* low. Most people realize this. Of the few people who do NOT realize this, I don't think there are a lot of Palm Pilot users.

As the web site makes clear, the initial product is designed for preparing for isolated nuclear bursts, not for broad-scale nuclear attacks. We believe that isolated bursts, either from terrorist or governmental attacks, are more likely than a large-scale attack, and are easier to protect against.

On the other hand, the risk of a full-fledged nuclear war is not insignificant. Our estimation is that the likeliest nuclear exchange would be between India and Pakistan, although other hotspots are also worth watching. For example, Russia's internal struggles remain of concern to Western analysts. The ThreatWatch page has several links to reports on present and expected dangers.

It's interesting to note that it's our critics that are resorting to hyperbole, using terms like 'apocalypse' and 'annihilation'.

You are a sick, sick man. Utterly unconscionable.

Please consider that I am really old (53) [but] all of the copy is difficult to read (size-wise)

We're surprised to hear this, since most text is in the default browser size, or larger. The major exception is the navigation bar at the bottom of each page. But it's easily solved.

In your browser, you should be able to enlarge the size of the text. In Internet Explorer 5.5, View | Text Size provides 5 size choices. In Netscape 6.2, the same command lets you make the font size arbitrarily large. In earlier versions of these browsers, the command is also available but located elsewhere.

If our font choices are difficult for you to read, you can change them as well. In Internet Explorer 5.5, after Tools | Internet Options, choose the Fonts button. After you select a font, choose the Accessibility button, and check off Ignore font styles specified on web pages. In Netscape 6.2, after Edit | Preferences, choose Fonts from the left menu. Uncheck Allow documents to use other fonts.

In both browsers, you can disable the formatting provided by our style sheet or provide one of your own. This would allow you to remove the background image used on every page or change our color choices.

None of these changes will affect the readability of text in graphics images. If this is a problem for you, we could have the page substitute larger images if you've overridden our font sizes. But hovering over an image will display its "alt" text, which may be sufficient for your needs.

We are committed to making our web site meet the highest web standards for accessibility. Currently, all pages meet the basic standard, but they will be revised to meet the strictest standard.

Likewise, the software itself will be accessible, subject to the limitations of the hardware and operating system.

If you have any particular needs or concerns, please notify us.

We're talking about profiting off of an international tragedy of unspeakable magnitude and importance. Profiting off of people's fears of one of the worst possible scenarios known to mankind. It is nothing illegal, of course. It's just exceedingly unethical and immoral.

By contrast, we feel that being aware of the possibility of a disaster and not doing something you could have done to mitigate it is exceedingly unethical and immoral. Fallout Shelter might not make a difference. But, to paraphrase Robert Heinlein in a similar context: damn it, we have to try!

(And nobody give any of that BS about how no one is profiting off of a national tragedy. I find it EXTREMELY unlikely that the idea for this product or anything like it would have some up if that f***head Osama hadn't turned the world upside down on September 11th.)

Unreasonable Software president, David Lubkin, has been concerned about preparedness since the 70's. He first came up with the idea for the product in 1983. 9/11 caused us to put other product lines on hold and focus on Fallout Shelter.

Fallout Shelter relies on unclassified data. In other words, bull s**t. Unclassified data is generally unconfirmed, unreliable and originally was reported on by uninformed people. Often maliciously knowing full well the information is false. Sometimes out of paranoia, spreading something that is nothing but a rumor. If Fallout Shelter were to prepare people using such data, it is effectively fueling and encouraging the paranoid lifestyle such users would already be living. That is neither healthy for them nor moral on your part.

Look at the last six months as an example. If I were one of these paranoid people likely to by such a product, and relied on it for informed decision making purposes using the rumors and reports of the last 6 months, I'd probably be living in the isolated Eukon by now.

Let's face it. No matter what this product does, if a nuclear attack came about, neither his product nor anybody elses will EVER be able to protect people or warn them far enough in advance so as to be beneficial. So it is not only unethically profiting off of people's fears, it is also profiting off of something that could never be delivered unless you had top secret clearance or were an intelligence gathering agency at least equally as capable as the CIA.

There have been hundreds of unclassified scientific or technical reports published from the 40's to today on the physics of nuclear weapons effects and the biological, engineering, or military implications of those effects. From the military, national laboratories, universities, think-tanks, and non-profit organizations, written by such 'uninformed' people as Hans Bethe and John Von Neumann. And thousands more on related topics, like how to design buildings so they aren't destroyed by a hurricane or an earthquake.

Fallout Shelter draws on these reports, not on rumor.

Congratulations!! Overall, well planned and very well executed. I won't tell you that I visited every page, but those that I did, work well, flow well and link easily. A real credit to your programming abilities. Again, Heartiest Congratulations, and best of luck on the launch.

So you would be able to sleep at night knowing that your products are fueling an unhealthy, isolated-from-society lifestyle? You could sleep at night knowing you were capitalizing on something of the gravest possible consequences, maybe the one thing on earth that has the potential to annihilate an entire species?

Once again, a straw man is raised and then knocked down. We encourage our customers to use Fallout Shelter not only to improve their family's protection but to protect their company and employees or their community.

On your other point — a terrorist attack on Chicago, which is the sort of hazard we're focussed on, does not have the gravest possible consequences. Even the unlikely scenario of an all-out nuclear spasm, where everyone launched everything, would not kill everyone, or even most of humanity. If you believe otherwise, support your assertion with facts, not hyperbole.

Whatever the attack, life will go on. Of course, the larger the attack, the harsher the implications. But life will go on. It might be short and hard. Just as life already is for billions today, and for everyone a century ago. We come from tough stock, though. Every one of us is descended from people who faced unbelievable adversity and tragedy, and survived.

I love capitalism just as much as every other entrepreneur in the world. But there's a limit to capitalism friends. It's called being humane. Empathetic. Caring and being supportive of mankind.

Capitalism and caring aren't mutually exclusive. We believe we're doing something that may save lives.

Making money off of something that fuels one of the worst things imaginable is just a disgusting proposition. I'm all for products that help people make more informed decisions, no matter what the nature of that decision is. If you were to build this as a product that helps people keep in touch with friends or prepare for a disaster of any kind, that'd be VERY, VERY different than one that purports to protect people from the aftermath of a nuclear attack.

Then you ought to support our product, because our goal is to provide users with information that may assist them in determining what advance preparations, if any, they might make. Of course the software by itself doesn't protect people. It provides facts; it's up to you to act on them.

The product as it stands is disgusting. Cool site design, and lovely quotes.

Thank you. We wanted a site that was simple, quick to load, easy to use, with a casual flavor. There are two new quote pages, Preparedness and Nuclear preparedness, and a few new quotes on the earlier pages.

I would never ever buy anything like that. But then again, I did not rush out to bank up on food and fuel on the verge of Y2K. A lot of people may feel safer by having this thing on their Palms. And having the customers feeling safer is all this product is going to achieve anyways. Is that worth the price for those customers? Why don't we let the market decide?

The website conveys the impression that the software is a product of passion, actually in use by the author. The author is positioned as knowing what he is talking about. The company presents the problem it wants to solve and credibly claims a need for the product backed by news reports and statements by experts on the topic. The product will create a controversy in the marketplace. This is widely regarded as a good thing by marketing experts.

Thank you. We appreciate your analysis. We did not deliberately set out to create a controversial product. Becoming better informed about significant risks in one's life seems like basic common sense to us, and to many others. But apparently there's a sizable part of the public that views this as kooky, at least when applied to nuclear hazards.

this site contains no flash. no ads. no animation. no frames.