3 ms·
Not joining. I like paper, and I don't care if some think it is wasteful. I like reading without a screen. I like the feel in my hands. It does not require
by sheraz 14y ago
Not joining.
I like paper, and I don't care if some think it is wasteful.
I like reading without a screen.
I like the feel in my hands.
It does not require batteries or electricity.
I can doodle and jot in the margins.
It spreads out on my work table as a kind of personal caching system.
It degrades gracefully, unlike a most digital file formats.
I would encourage anyone interested to find a copy of "The Myth of the Paperless office" by Abagail Sellen and Richard Harper [1] (No affiliate link below)
[1] - http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Paperless-Office-Abigail-Sellen/dp/026269283X http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Paperless-Office-Abigail-Sellen/d...
- 8ig8 14y agoI'm with you. I've got all this technology around so usually about twice a year I feel the need to take advantage of all these smart devices and go paperless. Each time, I eventually end up back at paper. To me, paper is frictionless. I can focus on capturing my thoughts without getting distracted or sidetracked. When reading from paper, I can write in the margin. When I've got a lot of thoughts, I flip over the page and write or draw on the back. It's great. I've got a stack of scrap paper (old one-sided print outs) that I use, so I feel less guilt about the 'waste'. I can't solve a hard problem without paper. Writing words, drawing lines, making physical connections makes the ideas flow for me.
- TruthElixirX 14y ago>I like paper, and I don't care if some think it is wasteful. It isn't wasteful though. Paper is a renewable resource and is mostly biodegradable. Forest growth in the U.S. increases every year due to people using wood for things. It is good.
- JMill 14y agoYour point about degrading gracefully is very important. Even with leading electronic record systems, paper will continue to be heavily used for producing backups, permanent copies, changelogs, etc. For example, a large regional hospital network with a state-of-the-art electronic patient record system generates a lengthy paper backup for each change made to the e-record. The system produces ~100,000 pages a month for just patient record changes. And this is considered an "all digital" system. Hmm. What appears to be happening is a fusion of both paper and digital as a best practice. Important information is recorded digitally because it is fast and convenient, and also recorded in analogue, on paper, to leave a legal trail and backup for when the electronic systems go down (and they do go down). (disclosure: I'm a cofounder of GetDimples.com, maker of ink-saving software and fonts.)
- Cowen 14y agoI don't think going paperless is for everyone, and I even agree that paper just feels better. That said, I'm personally transitioning to mostly paperless for purely pragmatic reasons. I can't keep my papers organized, and I no longer want to be bothered to constantly store and move them. It doesn't help that I save a bunch of papers "just in case" that I end up never needing again. I think I would be better off with a scanner and digital backups for everything. If I really need the information in paper format, I can just print it on-demand and not have drawers, folders, or bins lying around. Getting rid of all my old papers even has the added benefit of making every paper I do have that much more recent and important, which will (hopefully) lead to it being dealt with more promptly and efficiently rather than getting lost in some pile on my desk. That said, I'm certainly not joining this. I'll reconsider when my plan eventually blows up in my face.