Silly though it is, it's also a neat (if unintentional) proof-of-concept for the viability of tablets in psychology experiments with higher vertebrate animals and small children.

I've noticed that studies of animal intelligence that employ computers seem to feature equipment that is either very expensive or very primitive (not through any especial fault of the researchers, I hasten to add - it was technology which had not yet caught up to their ideas and needs). The iPad and its forthcoming competitors offer a pretty robust and capable device at a very low price, which suggests enormous scientific potential since many new research tools are now no more difficult to produce than a fairly modest webapp.

And yet, I for one found it very pertinent to HN. After all the discussion as to whether the iPad really is a revolution or not, I personally find this as convincing a demonstration as possible that a very intuitive interface has been created. It's a useful data point to have in mind when discussing iPad ergonomy.

I'm guessing it was flagged by a bunch of curmudgeons thinking "too much iPad!" I do not like the trend of flagging things for reasons of frequency rather than appropriateness, and I'm happy this made it onto the front page.