Count me in, if you can squeeze in one more at this late date.
Sadly, I had not read Judgment under Uncertainty, and still haven't. I don't recall ever saying I did, and can't find any email in which I claimed I'd read it.
However, I do recall being annoyed in 2002-2003 at Eliezer for joking that there was nothing worth reading that wasn't online and searchable through Google (or worse, that if it wasn't on the Net then it didn't exist). He did mention Judgment under Uncertainty on a mailing list (or on IRC) as something he would like to read, so I decided my donation to SIAI would be this book.
Eliezer doesn't make that particular annoying joke anymore. :)
I hope you can include this Tom the Dancing Bug cartoon in your e-book, as an example of what you're arguing against.
"This doesn't mean that probability theory has ceased to apply, any more than your inability to calculate the aerodynamics of a 747 on an atom-by-atom basis implies that the 747 is made out of atoms" should read "... is not made out of atoms."
"I could see myself carving one table leg, maybe, if there was something non-obvious to learn from the experience."
Not even four, so that you could then make a table? As long as we're still within the human-ish range of mind design space, have at least some respect for the sheer human pleasure of doing things without having to justify the educational value of every action. Orgasmium is not the only alternative to purism.