RE: filmscanners: Re: paperless office

["Sumtingwong" <Sumtingwong@hawaii.rr.com>]

I work for the government.  I am not that old.  I keep hard copies of
*everything*. ;)

Spencer Stone

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Laurie Solomon
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 6:28 AM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Re: paperless office


While what you note may very well be true, I for one do not think that the
legal aspects per se are the obstacles to a paperless society or office; I
think it is more human nature and work habits, convenience, efficiencies in
effort, and personal trust that comprise the major obstacles among others.

I do not want to have to get out and fire up a palmtop or lap top every time
I write a check in order to keep a record of that check and then have to go
home and back up that record everyday so as to have a backup copy of the
current check register.  I don't want to spend  more money on buying and
upgrading one more electronic gizmo to conduct my daily life or carry one
more electronic item on my person that I have to worry about electromagnetic
fields or pacemakers coming close to it and destroying the data or people.
I do not want to have to read 20 screen displays on a palmtop to get two or
three normal screen displays at a size that my eyes can read or three normal
screen displays to get one letter size paper page at a size I can
comfortably read under most lighting for any length of time.

As for personal security, the banks have tried to change over to all
electronic transactions in the recent past.  Old folks like myself have not
taken to it and do not trust it; we want the personal security of having a
hard copy in our hands and under our control (without being charged extra to
get it or have to wait longer than was the case when the banks used paper as
their basic media).  I personally have found too many erroneous entries in
the electronic records which then become almost impossible to track down and
correct ( with each party telling the other that they are wrong because
their computer says what they say).  Younger people tend to be more
accepting of the electronic banking, having grown up with it and not knowing
otherwise in many cases; but even here, many are discovering the pitfalls of
relying exclusively on electronic records generated and controlled by
others, of depending on the institutions to not commit errors in entering
data or outputting results, or of accepting on faith the client's complaint
that there is an error on the part of the institution in the record. Ever
try and prove that the banks cashed a check for more than it was drafted for
because a teller somewhere down the line was sloppy in reading the amount
off the check or their data entry when you do not have any hard copy
(original cancelled check, photocopy of the check, or photograph of the
check in hand to back up your claim?

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Sumtingwong
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 10:00 PM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Re: paperless office


A law was just passed here in the US that makes a digital signature (i.e.
email) good in court.

Spencer Stone

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Gordon Tassi
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:00 AM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: paperless office


Although we are getting closer to a paperless society, I think that the
biggest
impediment is based on our legal system.  Though we could electronically
transmit
signed documents showing some type of commitment to do something, the demand
of a
document that has a "fresh" signature is still the legal standard.  The fax
machine has been around for many years but a document with a real signature
is
most often demanded and follows the fax in the mail.

Paperless will not arrive until a) everyone has a computer, b) they are
willing to
acept a legal commitment via computer, c) the electronic security systems
can
absolutely assure that people cannot be tamper with the records of falsify
them,
and d) the courts accept that an an electronic copy is absolute proof of the
legal
commitment.  We have a long way to go to get to that point.  In the
meantime, we
will have to settle for trying to be a society with less paper.

Gordon

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> Laurie Solomon wrote:
>
> > I would suggest (a) that your office is a rarity, (b) your office
> > technically is not a "paperless office" in that you still receive
invoices,
> > receipts, etc. from others that you need to scan in, and (c) most other
> > places which are relying heavily on electronic operations still tend to
keep
> > paper backup files and archives of their files and records just in case
as
> > do their workers for their personal security and use.
>

Arthur Entlich wrote

> We have enculturated certain specific habits and styles of functionality
over
> many hundreds of years which have involved the use of paper/hard copy
documents,
> books, etc.

> Ironically, when we have computers that more mimic our relationship with
paper,
> we will get closer to the "paperless" society.
>
> Art