> If it isn't broken why fix it? Who says paper isn't broken? The only argument I see for paper in your comment is that a segment of the population are unwilli

> If it isn't broken why fix it? Who says paper isn't broken? The only argument I see for paper in your comment is that a segment of the population are unwilling to use anything else. According to available statistics on the matter, we can assume that is around 20%. What about the 20% who only use paper because we're not given any other option (I count myself among that group)? How did the first 20% become a more powerful group and why are the remaining 80% of us letting them hold us back from realizing the advantages of electronic systems?