<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_21_1843244</id>
	<title>What Is Holding Back the Paperless Office?</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1269199380000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Drethon writes <i>"CNN has an article (are we up to the millionth article on this topic?) <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/18/paperless.office/index.html?hpt=Sbin">asking if the paperless office has arrived</a>. This got me wondering, what are the main things holding back the paperless office?  Just off the top of my head, the main thing keeping me printing out documents is the ability to spread a dozen pages of a document under review out on my table and marking it up by hand.  PDF and Word markups are not too bad but they still lack the ability to spread many pages out to look over at the same time and could be improved to make markup a bit less restrictive. I do find myself printing out less with the use of dual monitors to have source documents and work under progress up at the same time, perhaps something like Microsoft's tabletop computer used as a desk will let me have at least a paperless desk. I know there are other reasons why offices are not becoming paperless.  What are your reasons?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Drethon writes " CNN has an article ( are we up to the millionth article on this topic ?
) asking if the paperless office has arrived .
This got me wondering , what are the main things holding back the paperless office ?
Just off the top of my head , the main thing keeping me printing out documents is the ability to spread a dozen pages of a document under review out on my table and marking it up by hand .
PDF and Word markups are not too bad but they still lack the ability to spread many pages out to look over at the same time and could be improved to make markup a bit less restrictive .
I do find myself printing out less with the use of dual monitors to have source documents and work under progress up at the same time , perhaps something like Microsoft 's tabletop computer used as a desk will let me have at least a paperless desk .
I know there are other reasons why offices are not becoming paperless .
What are your reasons ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Drethon writes "CNN has an article (are we up to the millionth article on this topic?
) asking if the paperless office has arrived.
This got me wondering, what are the main things holding back the paperless office?
Just off the top of my head, the main thing keeping me printing out documents is the ability to spread a dozen pages of a document under review out on my table and marking it up by hand.
PDF and Word markups are not too bad but they still lack the ability to spread many pages out to look over at the same time and could be improved to make markup a bit less restrictive.
I do find myself printing out less with the use of dual monitors to have source documents and work under progress up at the same time, perhaps something like Microsoft's tabletop computer used as a desk will let me have at least a paperless desk.
I know there are other reasons why offices are not becoming paperless.
What are your reasons?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559366</id>
	<title>Change as good as a holiday</title>
	<author>Boronx</author>
	<datestamp>1269203820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paper offers the chance to get up and walk around while reading or the chance to go to another part of the office to write.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper offers the chance to get up and walk around while reading or the chance to go to another part of the office to write .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper offers the chance to get up and walk around while reading or the chance to go to another part of the office to write.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559522</id>
	<title>Erasable paper</title>
	<author>mwvdlee</author>
	<datestamp>1269204780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paperless office is probably never going to happen; paper is just too convenient.</p><p>The problem trying to be solved isn't lots of paper though, it's the environmental effects of printing and throwing away lots of paper.</p><p>There are currently some printers out there that handle special paper that can be erased. With a decade of R&amp;D more we could have affordable, erasable paper and pens and markers to go along with that paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paperless office is probably never going to happen ; paper is just too convenient.The problem trying to be solved is n't lots of paper though , it 's the environmental effects of printing and throwing away lots of paper.There are currently some printers out there that handle special paper that can be erased .
With a decade of R&amp;D more we could have affordable , erasable paper and pens and markers to go along with that paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paperless office is probably never going to happen; paper is just too convenient.The problem trying to be solved isn't lots of paper though, it's the environmental effects of printing and throwing away lots of paper.There are currently some printers out there that handle special paper that can be erased.
With a decade of R&amp;D more we could have affordable, erasable paper and pens and markers to go along with that paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559468</id>
	<title>Metadata is important!</title>
	<author>dfxm</author>
	<datestamp>1269204480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Humans...  We like to have a piece of paper in our hands, we can easily hand it to a coworker, we can scribble on it to take notes.  I know it sounds oldskool, but for many tasks, a piece of paper is just superior.</p></div><p>For a lot of my tasks, electronic records are better because you can attach metadata to documents to more easily search, sort and drive workflow. This then makes my tasks easier, quicker and less error-prone.<br> <br>I feel like this is more of an issue with people not understanding what metadata is and what it can do for them rather than an issue of people liking paper.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans... We like to have a piece of paper in our hands , we can easily hand it to a coworker , we can scribble on it to take notes .
I know it sounds oldskool , but for many tasks , a piece of paper is just superior.For a lot of my tasks , electronic records are better because you can attach metadata to documents to more easily search , sort and drive workflow .
This then makes my tasks easier , quicker and less error-prone .
I feel like this is more of an issue with people not understanding what metadata is and what it can do for them rather than an issue of people liking paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans...  We like to have a piece of paper in our hands, we can easily hand it to a coworker, we can scribble on it to take notes.
I know it sounds oldskool, but for many tasks, a piece of paper is just superior.For a lot of my tasks, electronic records are better because you can attach metadata to documents to more easily search, sort and drive workflow.
This then makes my tasks easier, quicker and less error-prone.
I feel like this is more of an issue with people not understanding what metadata is and what it can do for them rather than an issue of people liking paper.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561072</id>
	<title>Jeez. We have bidets these days</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1269171960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>hand (just use your other hand for eating) or cloth in the toilet. Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.</p></div><p>You're American, right?</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>hand ( just use your other hand for eating ) or cloth in the toilet .
Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.You 're American , right ?
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>hand (just use your other hand for eating) or cloth in the toilet.
Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.You're American, right?
 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560100</id>
	<title>Mostly paperless in my world</title>
	<author>DNAGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1269165540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my office, there are about a hundred employees and we rely on three printers which mostly sit idle.  As a software development company, most of the things we are working on are digital to start with.  I routinely go months without handling a piece of paper at work.</p><p>At home, there are still one or two things that come as paper mail, usually financial in nature.  That gets scanned and shredded unless I'm required to keep it by law - tax documents for example.  I have a three or four inch thick stack of legal and financial papers in my safe and that's all the paper in my life.</p><p>The paperless office is rare, perhaps, but quite possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my office , there are about a hundred employees and we rely on three printers which mostly sit idle .
As a software development company , most of the things we are working on are digital to start with .
I routinely go months without handling a piece of paper at work.At home , there are still one or two things that come as paper mail , usually financial in nature .
That gets scanned and shredded unless I 'm required to keep it by law - tax documents for example .
I have a three or four inch thick stack of legal and financial papers in my safe and that 's all the paper in my life.The paperless office is rare , perhaps , but quite possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my office, there are about a hundred employees and we rely on three printers which mostly sit idle.
As a software development company, most of the things we are working on are digital to start with.
I routinely go months without handling a piece of paper at work.At home, there are still one or two things that come as paper mail, usually financial in nature.
That gets scanned and shredded unless I'm required to keep it by law - tax documents for example.
I have a three or four inch thick stack of legal and financial papers in my safe and that's all the paper in my life.The paperless office is rare, perhaps, but quite possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442</id>
	<title>The paperless toilet.</title>
	<author>Charles Dodgeson</author>
	<datestamp>1269204300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back in the 80s, I remember someone saying that a paperless office would be about as useful as the paperless toilet.</p><p>I'm not sure why I feel that this is true.  But I'm hoping this discussion will provide insight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in the 80s , I remember someone saying that a paperless office would be about as useful as the paperless toilet.I 'm not sure why I feel that this is true .
But I 'm hoping this discussion will provide insight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in the 80s, I remember someone saying that a paperless office would be about as useful as the paperless toilet.I'm not sure why I feel that this is true.
But I'm hoping this discussion will provide insight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560022</id>
	<title>Graphic Artists...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269165000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work in the art department of a marketing agency, and sit in Photoshop and Illustrator all day. Sometimes, it just pays off to run a quick print of your work and look at it on paper.  It can give a better idea of what the end user will see, and can also give a different perspective on my work, visually, in that it helps give a better birds' eye view of an ad or web page I'm working on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in the art department of a marketing agency , and sit in Photoshop and Illustrator all day .
Sometimes , it just pays off to run a quick print of your work and look at it on paper .
It can give a better idea of what the end user will see , and can also give a different perspective on my work , visually , in that it helps give a better birds ' eye view of an ad or web page I 'm working on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in the art department of a marketing agency, and sit in Photoshop and Illustrator all day.
Sometimes, it just pays off to run a quick print of your work and look at it on paper.
It can give a better idea of what the end user will see, and can also give a different perspective on my work, visually, in that it helps give a better birds' eye view of an ad or web page I'm working on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561774</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>sribe</author>
	<datestamp>1269177780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you work in health care... you must keep paper copies of most of your stuff.</p></div><p>Not true at all. I've personally taken a medical clinic paperless<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-) And know of large hospitals that no longer keep paper charts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you work in health care... you must keep paper copies of most of your stuff.Not true at all .
I 've personally taken a medical clinic paperless ; - ) And know of large hospitals that no longer keep paper charts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you work in health care... you must keep paper copies of most of your stuff.Not true at all.
I've personally taken a medical clinic paperless ;-) And know of large hospitals that no longer keep paper charts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560124</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>clickety6</author>
	<datestamp>1269165720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet.</p></div><p>But they both mean everything has to be done digitally...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet.But they both mean everything has to be done digitally... ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet.But they both mean everything has to be done digitally... ;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31569178</id>
	<title>Re:You!</title>
	<author>fuzzywig</author>
	<datestamp>1269274800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, I'd out a slightly different spin on it, I'd say the answer is:
<p>
Old people!
</p><p>
In our office, pretty much everyone under the age of 30, has grown up with computers, and they are fine with reading text on a screen.  </p><p>
Most of the people over 30 say that that they can't read large amounts of text off a screen, and that reading printed material is easier (actually, they say "<b>you</b> can't read as easily off a screen", but what they mean is: "<b>I</b>, can't read off a screen").
<br>
Consequently, apart from people who have to deal with paper letters as part of their jobs (a lot of our invoices still go out on paper, but that's mainly going to email now), the only people who print stuff out are the 'old' people.
<br>
Now if only I could stop them from printing out stuff that they never even pick from the printer...
</p><p>
(most of our users have dual screens, it just makes work much easier)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I 'd out a slightly different spin on it , I 'd say the answer is : Old people !
In our office , pretty much everyone under the age of 30 , has grown up with computers , and they are fine with reading text on a screen .
Most of the people over 30 say that that they ca n't read large amounts of text off a screen , and that reading printed material is easier ( actually , they say " you ca n't read as easily off a screen " , but what they mean is : " I , ca n't read off a screen " ) .
Consequently , apart from people who have to deal with paper letters as part of their jobs ( a lot of our invoices still go out on paper , but that 's mainly going to email now ) , the only people who print stuff out are the 'old ' people .
Now if only I could stop them from printing out stuff that they never even pick from the printer.. . ( most of our users have dual screens , it just makes work much easier )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I'd out a slightly different spin on it, I'd say the answer is:

Old people!
In our office, pretty much everyone under the age of 30, has grown up with computers, and they are fine with reading text on a screen.
Most of the people over 30 say that that they can't read large amounts of text off a screen, and that reading printed material is easier (actually, they say "you can't read as easily off a screen", but what they mean is: "I, can't read off a screen").
Consequently, apart from people who have to deal with paper letters as part of their jobs (a lot of our invoices still go out on paper, but that's mainly going to email now), the only people who print stuff out are the 'old' people.
Now if only I could stop them from printing out stuff that they never even pick from the printer...

(most of our users have dual screens, it just makes work much easier)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559926</id>
	<title>See the book "The Myth of the Paperless Office"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269164460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/?tid=8501&amp;ttype=2</p><p>Paper has "affordances" that computer systems cannot duplicate. You can spread a bunch of paper documents out for reference while you're creating a new document. You can mark it up by hand, and then pass it on, with the markup clearly identifiable as yours.  You can hand the "customer file" to another account rep, and the physical transfer serves as a notification to others that custody has changed., etc.etc.etc.</p><p>Let's not forget things like rapidly shuffling through pages, sticking your fingers in as temporary bookmarks, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/ ? tid = 8501&amp;ttype = 2Paper has " affordances " that computer systems can not duplicate .
You can spread a bunch of paper documents out for reference while you 're creating a new document .
You can mark it up by hand , and then pass it on , with the markup clearly identifiable as yours .
You can hand the " customer file " to another account rep , and the physical transfer serves as a notification to others that custody has changed. , etc.etc.etc.Let 's not forget things like rapidly shuffling through pages , sticking your fingers in as temporary bookmarks , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/?tid=8501&amp;ttype=2Paper has "affordances" that computer systems cannot duplicate.
You can spread a bunch of paper documents out for reference while you're creating a new document.
You can mark it up by hand, and then pass it on, with the markup clearly identifiable as yours.
You can hand the "customer file" to another account rep, and the physical transfer serves as a notification to others that custody has changed., etc.etc.etc.Let's not forget things like rapidly shuffling through pages, sticking your fingers in as temporary bookmarks, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559466</id>
	<title>Paper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paper of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper of course.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564140</id>
	<title>What Is Holding Back the Paperless Office?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269199260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559656</id>
	<title>It's the lack of markup</title>
	<author>ka9dgx</author>
	<datestamp>1269162660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paper allows markup, and so does papyrus. Clay tablets do as well, until they are dry or fired in a kiln.</p><p>Paperless "documents" can be made to support markup. Ted Nelson was talking about it in the 1960s. It's his inability to ship product (like Babbage before him) that kept his vision from being popularized.</p><p>When TBL got around to building the first web servers, and there arose a need for formatting, the term HTML got picked. The world was done a great disservice by the term HTML, which doesn't allow markup of text, let alone hypertext.</p><p>HTML has effectively banned discussion of old school markup, because for a large portion of cases, people didn't really need markup, they just wanted formatting, so they went along with the term. Anyone who wanted old school markup just had to lump it, because the programmers didn't think it necessary, and thus the code to implement it never happened.</p><p>It's the effective banning of the concept because everyone now thinks exclusively as formatting internal to original source material that makes it almost impossible to even discuss adding markup on top of existing hypertext by a second or more parties.</p><p>We need markup. The old school kind, and its this deficiency that makes paper so bloody useful even now.</p><p>Google hates linguistic forking, and actively suppresses it by it's very nature. This means HTML will never be about markup, and we'll have to invent some new way of talking about it.</p><p>So here we are, 40 years after Ted Nelson, and we still use paper when we need markup.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper allows markup , and so does papyrus .
Clay tablets do as well , until they are dry or fired in a kiln.Paperless " documents " can be made to support markup .
Ted Nelson was talking about it in the 1960s .
It 's his inability to ship product ( like Babbage before him ) that kept his vision from being popularized.When TBL got around to building the first web servers , and there arose a need for formatting , the term HTML got picked .
The world was done a great disservice by the term HTML , which does n't allow markup of text , let alone hypertext.HTML has effectively banned discussion of old school markup , because for a large portion of cases , people did n't really need markup , they just wanted formatting , so they went along with the term .
Anyone who wanted old school markup just had to lump it , because the programmers did n't think it necessary , and thus the code to implement it never happened.It 's the effective banning of the concept because everyone now thinks exclusively as formatting internal to original source material that makes it almost impossible to even discuss adding markup on top of existing hypertext by a second or more parties.We need markup .
The old school kind , and its this deficiency that makes paper so bloody useful even now.Google hates linguistic forking , and actively suppresses it by it 's very nature .
This means HTML will never be about markup , and we 'll have to invent some new way of talking about it.So here we are , 40 years after Ted Nelson , and we still use paper when we need markup .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper allows markup, and so does papyrus.
Clay tablets do as well, until they are dry or fired in a kiln.Paperless "documents" can be made to support markup.
Ted Nelson was talking about it in the 1960s.
It's his inability to ship product (like Babbage before him) that kept his vision from being popularized.When TBL got around to building the first web servers, and there arose a need for formatting, the term HTML got picked.
The world was done a great disservice by the term HTML, which doesn't allow markup of text, let alone hypertext.HTML has effectively banned discussion of old school markup, because for a large portion of cases, people didn't really need markup, they just wanted formatting, so they went along with the term.
Anyone who wanted old school markup just had to lump it, because the programmers didn't think it necessary, and thus the code to implement it never happened.It's the effective banning of the concept because everyone now thinks exclusively as formatting internal to original source material that makes it almost impossible to even discuss adding markup on top of existing hypertext by a second or more parties.We need markup.
The old school kind, and its this deficiency that makes paper so bloody useful even now.Google hates linguistic forking, and actively suppresses it by it's very nature.
This means HTML will never be about markup, and we'll have to invent some new way of talking about it.So here we are, 40 years after Ted Nelson, and we still use paper when we need markup.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565316</id>
	<title>Backups aren't infallible - which medium?</title>
	<author>crivens</author>
	<datestamp>1269261900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We store our home photos on CDs and only print the really good photos at Walmart/Blacks/Shoppers etc. This saves us money but we get to keep some photos that aren't good enough to print but worth keeping all the same. So we're almost "paperless" in that sense. But a paperless office needs a solid backup strategy but what backup medium can survive in the long run 100\%? An office (or home user) could burn to CD/DVD but how long will they last before they become inaccessible?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We store our home photos on CDs and only print the really good photos at Walmart/Blacks/Shoppers etc .
This saves us money but we get to keep some photos that are n't good enough to print but worth keeping all the same .
So we 're almost " paperless " in that sense .
But a paperless office needs a solid backup strategy but what backup medium can survive in the long run 100 \ % ?
An office ( or home user ) could burn to CD/DVD but how long will they last before they become inaccessible ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We store our home photos on CDs and only print the really good photos at Walmart/Blacks/Shoppers etc.
This saves us money but we get to keep some photos that aren't good enough to print but worth keeping all the same.
So we're almost "paperless" in that sense.
But a paperless office needs a solid backup strategy but what backup medium can survive in the long run 100\%?
An office (or home user) could burn to CD/DVD but how long will they last before they become inaccessible?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562058</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269179760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hey, but they extinct...<br>maybe precisely because of this...<br>think about it, my friend...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hey , but they extinct...maybe precisely because of this...think about it , my friend.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hey, but they extinct...maybe precisely because of this...think about it, my friend...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559552</id>
	<title>Screen Size; Fragility of Data; Markup ...</title>
	<author>gordguide</author>
	<datestamp>1269204960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People print out documents because, for one, they want to view non-continuous pages. A monitor that could show, say 6 full pages might do the trick.</p><p>Another reason is to have a permanent copy; people all have a story where documents were lost due to some data-related problem.</p><p>Finally, some people want to mark up pages. Although there are ways to do that on a computer, vendor proprietary formats, cost of applications, and generally not really working as well as people want make print and the pencil by far the easiest solution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People print out documents because , for one , they want to view non-continuous pages .
A monitor that could show , say 6 full pages might do the trick.Another reason is to have a permanent copy ; people all have a story where documents were lost due to some data-related problem.Finally , some people want to mark up pages .
Although there are ways to do that on a computer , vendor proprietary formats , cost of applications , and generally not really working as well as people want make print and the pencil by far the easiest solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People print out documents because, for one, they want to view non-continuous pages.
A monitor that could show, say 6 full pages might do the trick.Another reason is to have a permanent copy; people all have a story where documents were lost due to some data-related problem.Finally, some people want to mark up pages.
Although there are ways to do that on a computer, vendor proprietary formats, cost of applications, and generally not really working as well as people want make print and the pencil by far the easiest solution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560056</id>
	<title>Signatures! Signatures! Signatures!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1269165180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried the paperless office with my old company. And the problem is, that other companies don&rsquo;t accept your digital signatures (even if they are official ones issued by the state), and that your clients won&rsquo;t buy a expensive device and get a digital signature, just so they can make valid digital contracts with you.</p><p>Other than that, everything works. You scan every piece of paper you get in the mail (if it&rsquo;s not spam), or remove your mailbox right away. And everything else happens via e-mail. Many companies already send you their invoices via e-mail anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried the paperless office with my old company .
And the problem is , that other companies don    t accept your digital signatures ( even if they are official ones issued by the state ) , and that your clients won    t buy a expensive device and get a digital signature , just so they can make valid digital contracts with you.Other than that , everything works .
You scan every piece of paper you get in the mail ( if it    s not spam ) , or remove your mailbox right away .
And everything else happens via e-mail .
Many companies already send you their invoices via e-mail anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried the paperless office with my old company.
And the problem is, that other companies don’t accept your digital signatures (even if they are official ones issued by the state), and that your clients won’t buy a expensive device and get a digital signature, just so they can make valid digital contracts with you.Other than that, everything works.
You scan every piece of paper you get in the mail (if it’s not spam), or remove your mailbox right away.
And everything else happens via e-mail.
Many companies already send you their invoices via e-mail anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560506</id>
	<title>Archiving</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269168240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back then at a university in Germany we decided to correct students weekly tasksheets via email.<br>The law department gave a specification how these data had to be saved. this included multiple offsite backups using specified and controlled systems etc. Thus we decided: every student prints his solution in addition to the email and the printouts get archived.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back then at a university in Germany we decided to correct students weekly tasksheets via email.The law department gave a specification how these data had to be saved .
this included multiple offsite backups using specified and controlled systems etc .
Thus we decided : every student prints his solution in addition to the email and the printouts get archived .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back then at a university in Germany we decided to correct students weekly tasksheets via email.The law department gave a specification how these data had to be saved.
this included multiple offsite backups using specified and controlled systems etc.
Thus we decided: every student prints his solution in addition to the email and the printouts get archived.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564276</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1269201540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From a legal POV that might not be valid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From a legal POV that might not be valid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a legal POV that might not be valid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559464</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269162960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Instead of paper you could use water, hand (just use your other hand for eating) or cloth in the toilet. Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of paper you could use water , hand ( just use your other hand for eating ) or cloth in the toilet .
Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of paper you could use water, hand (just use your other hand for eating) or cloth in the toilet.
Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559326</id>
	<title>Paper and...</title>
	<author>dov\_0</author>
	<datestamp>1269203400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Office printers. It's just too easy to prepare a document and hit 'print'. It's also incredibly easy to produce larger quantities with the good old photocopier. In short, while the human preference for paper has not diminished to any great degree, the ease of producing paper documents in large quantities has increased dramatically.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Office printers .
It 's just too easy to prepare a document and hit 'print' .
It 's also incredibly easy to produce larger quantities with the good old photocopier .
In short , while the human preference for paper has not diminished to any great degree , the ease of producing paper documents in large quantities has increased dramatically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Office printers.
It's just too easy to prepare a document and hit 'print'.
It's also incredibly easy to produce larger quantities with the good old photocopier.
In short, while the human preference for paper has not diminished to any great degree, the ease of producing paper documents in large quantities has increased dramatically.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560668</id>
	<title>And for the millionth time, the answer is simple.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269169380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><tt>while ((paper.cost &lt; computer.cost) &amp;&amp; (paper.ubiquity &gt; computer.ubiquity) &amp;&amp; (paper.easeOfUse &gt; computer.easeOfUse))<br>{<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; paperlessOffice = false.<br>}<br></tt></p><p>So if you want a paperless office work on raising the price and lowering the usability of paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>while ( ( paper.cost computer.ubiquity ) &amp;&amp; ( paper.easeOfUse &gt; computer.easeOfUse ) ) {           paperlessOffice = false .
} So if you want a paperless office work on raising the price and lowering the usability of paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>while ((paper.cost  computer.ubiquity) &amp;&amp; (paper.easeOfUse &gt; computer.easeOfUse)){
          paperlessOffice = false.
}So if you want a paperless office work on raising the price and lowering the usability of paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559576</id>
	<title>Old people!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269205140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn those dinosaurs!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn those dinosaurs !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn those dinosaurs!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559402</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>anagama</author>
	<datestamp>1269204120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally, I don't really like how paper feels because when I'm handling a lot of it, it tends to dry out my hands -- particularly if it is still hot from the printer or copier.<br> <br>In my office, we use a mix of digitized images, summaries stored in a database, and physical paper because each has qualities that make it good for specific tasks.  As the GP mentioned, spreading out documents can be very efficient for certain tasks.  For example, in my office we deal with a lot of medical records, many of which are hand written.  Although we may receive them as PDFs, organizing those on a computer screen would be ridiculously slow -- it is much faster to print out the lot and sort them according to our needs.  By the same token, if I want to know if I received a particular document some unknown number of years ago, searching the DB for the summary is way faster than digging a file out archives and thumbing through it, and being able to quickly access an image of that document is icing on the cake.<br> <br>Anyway, I love technology, but it is appropriate to use it judiciously.  If something is more easily done on a computer, by all means do it that way, but if it is more easily done on paper, it makes no business sense to do it on a computer.  The reason the paperless office doesn't have 100\% reign is the same reason the microwave oven has not replaced the old style gas or electric stove/oven -- microwave ovens do some things well, but they don't do ALL things well (or they do nothing well, depending on your preference for taste over speed).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I do n't really like how paper feels because when I 'm handling a lot of it , it tends to dry out my hands -- particularly if it is still hot from the printer or copier .
In my office , we use a mix of digitized images , summaries stored in a database , and physical paper because each has qualities that make it good for specific tasks .
As the GP mentioned , spreading out documents can be very efficient for certain tasks .
For example , in my office we deal with a lot of medical records , many of which are hand written .
Although we may receive them as PDFs , organizing those on a computer screen would be ridiculously slow -- it is much faster to print out the lot and sort them according to our needs .
By the same token , if I want to know if I received a particular document some unknown number of years ago , searching the DB for the summary is way faster than digging a file out archives and thumbing through it , and being able to quickly access an image of that document is icing on the cake .
Anyway , I love technology , but it is appropriate to use it judiciously .
If something is more easily done on a computer , by all means do it that way , but if it is more easily done on paper , it makes no business sense to do it on a computer .
The reason the paperless office does n't have 100 \ % reign is the same reason the microwave oven has not replaced the old style gas or electric stove/oven -- microwave ovens do some things well , but they do n't do ALL things well ( or they do nothing well , depending on your preference for taste over speed ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I don't really like how paper feels because when I'm handling a lot of it, it tends to dry out my hands -- particularly if it is still hot from the printer or copier.
In my office, we use a mix of digitized images, summaries stored in a database, and physical paper because each has qualities that make it good for specific tasks.
As the GP mentioned, spreading out documents can be very efficient for certain tasks.
For example, in my office we deal with a lot of medical records, many of which are hand written.
Although we may receive them as PDFs, organizing those on a computer screen would be ridiculously slow -- it is much faster to print out the lot and sort them according to our needs.
By the same token, if I want to know if I received a particular document some unknown number of years ago, searching the DB for the summary is way faster than digging a file out archives and thumbing through it, and being able to quickly access an image of that document is icing on the cake.
Anyway, I love technology, but it is appropriate to use it judiciously.
If something is more easily done on a computer, by all means do it that way, but if it is more easily done on paper, it makes no business sense to do it on a computer.
The reason the paperless office doesn't have 100\% reign is the same reason the microwave oven has not replaced the old style gas or electric stove/oven -- microwave ovens do some things well, but they don't do ALL things well (or they do nothing well, depending on your preference for taste over speed).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560324</id>
	<title>Re:Prices &amp; UI...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269167040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Paper is incredibly cheap...</p></div><p>Printer ink isn't.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper is incredibly cheap...Printer ink is n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper is incredibly cheap...Printer ink isn't.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560654</id>
	<title>Tablet + OneNote = what you need.</title>
	<author>postermmxvicom</author>
	<datestamp>1269169260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am a math teacher and use a tablet wirelessly connected to a projector to teach using OneNote. It has all the advantages of a chalkboard or pen and paper plus:<br> <br>

I always have all of my notes. Always.<br> <br>

My notes are in color. I have a large selection of colors and sizes. (and my highlighters dont get messed up or run out)<br> <br>

If I didnt leave myself enough room, I can make more room.<br> <br>

If I want to take an idea in another direction, I can copy what I have to another page and fork off in the direction I want.<br> <br>

Using OneNote, I can search through my handwritten notes as if they were text. Very useful for quickly finding old notes that are buried amidst lots of notes.<br> <br>

I can resize diagrams.<br> <br>

I can print pages to OneNote and use OCR to get the text from it or write all over it.<br> <br>

I can quickly copy any part of my screen to it.<br> <br>

I can publish my notes as PDF's or print copies.<br> <br>

I have not found one draw back. In fact, I would like you to try to think of one (perhaps I have over looked it).<br> <br>


Make sure you turn on pressure sensitive ink (obviously buy a tablet that is pressure sensitive) and select an ink thick enough so you can see the changes in width with the changes in pressure. This makes it look just like a hand written diagram.<br> <br>

The only word of caution to teachers is if you are copying and pasting something - give your students time to recopy it in their notes.<br> <br>

Also, get a tablet that is convertible. Then it is your laptop when you are doing regular stuff and yet when you need to draw a diagram - you can!<br> <br>

The real motto for tablet computers needs to be "Use but not over use" (just like the motion stuff for wii)<br> <br>

Dont write a paper in tablet mode - type it, it's faster. etc.<br> <br>

I am a mathematician who, like yourself, "thinks on paper". The tablet is the computer you need. <br> <br>

Get one with a dual digitizer. Active and passive. Get a convertible. Get OneNote. Resist the urge to do everything in tablet mode. I would bet most people with your sensibilities would not be disappointed. I know I am not. <br> <br>

Plus, I've heard there are OneNote like apps which also do math stuff, like evaluate determinants for you, draw graphs, take derivatives etc.. I have not looked into those yet.<br> <br>

I have used this set up for four years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a math teacher and use a tablet wirelessly connected to a projector to teach using OneNote .
It has all the advantages of a chalkboard or pen and paper plus : I always have all of my notes .
Always . My notes are in color .
I have a large selection of colors and sizes .
( and my highlighters dont get messed up or run out ) If I didnt leave myself enough room , I can make more room .
If I want to take an idea in another direction , I can copy what I have to another page and fork off in the direction I want .
Using OneNote , I can search through my handwritten notes as if they were text .
Very useful for quickly finding old notes that are buried amidst lots of notes .
I can resize diagrams .
I can print pages to OneNote and use OCR to get the text from it or write all over it .
I can quickly copy any part of my screen to it .
I can publish my notes as PDF 's or print copies .
I have not found one draw back .
In fact , I would like you to try to think of one ( perhaps I have over looked it ) .
Make sure you turn on pressure sensitive ink ( obviously buy a tablet that is pressure sensitive ) and select an ink thick enough so you can see the changes in width with the changes in pressure .
This makes it look just like a hand written diagram .
The only word of caution to teachers is if you are copying and pasting something - give your students time to recopy it in their notes .
Also , get a tablet that is convertible .
Then it is your laptop when you are doing regular stuff and yet when you need to draw a diagram - you can !
The real motto for tablet computers needs to be " Use but not over use " ( just like the motion stuff for wii ) Dont write a paper in tablet mode - type it , it 's faster .
etc . I am a mathematician who , like yourself , " thinks on paper " .
The tablet is the computer you need .
Get one with a dual digitizer .
Active and passive .
Get a convertible .
Get OneNote .
Resist the urge to do everything in tablet mode .
I would bet most people with your sensibilities would not be disappointed .
I know I am not .
Plus , I 've heard there are OneNote like apps which also do math stuff , like evaluate determinants for you , draw graphs , take derivatives etc.. I have not looked into those yet .
I have used this set up for four years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a math teacher and use a tablet wirelessly connected to a projector to teach using OneNote.
It has all the advantages of a chalkboard or pen and paper plus: 

I always have all of my notes.
Always. 

My notes are in color.
I have a large selection of colors and sizes.
(and my highlighters dont get messed up or run out) 

If I didnt leave myself enough room, I can make more room.
If I want to take an idea in another direction, I can copy what I have to another page and fork off in the direction I want.
Using OneNote, I can search through my handwritten notes as if they were text.
Very useful for quickly finding old notes that are buried amidst lots of notes.
I can resize diagrams.
I can print pages to OneNote and use OCR to get the text from it or write all over it.
I can quickly copy any part of my screen to it.
I can publish my notes as PDF's or print copies.
I have not found one draw back.
In fact, I would like you to try to think of one (perhaps I have over looked it).
Make sure you turn on pressure sensitive ink (obviously buy a tablet that is pressure sensitive) and select an ink thick enough so you can see the changes in width with the changes in pressure.
This makes it look just like a hand written diagram.
The only word of caution to teachers is if you are copying and pasting something - give your students time to recopy it in their notes.
Also, get a tablet that is convertible.
Then it is your laptop when you are doing regular stuff and yet when you need to draw a diagram - you can!
The real motto for tablet computers needs to be "Use but not over use" (just like the motion stuff for wii) 

Dont write a paper in tablet mode - type it, it's faster.
etc. 

I am a mathematician who, like yourself, "thinks on paper".
The tablet is the computer you need.
Get one with a dual digitizer.
Active and passive.
Get a convertible.
Get OneNote.
Resist the urge to do everything in tablet mode.
I would bet most people with your sensibilities would not be disappointed.
I know I am not.
Plus, I've heard there are OneNote like apps which also do math stuff, like evaluate determinants for you, draw graphs, take derivatives etc.. I have not looked into those yet.
I have used this set up for four years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561794</id>
	<title>Re:Prices &amp; UI...</title>
	<author>sribe</author>
	<datestamp>1269177900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>At ~1 cent per page...</p><p>What??? You might want to re-check your prices!</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At ~ 1 cent per page...What ? ? ?
You might want to re-check your prices !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At ~1 cent per page...What???
You might want to re-check your prices!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559472</id>
	<title>Re:Resistance Of Change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Sometimes people are even brave enough to ask.....</i></p><p>The rest are not lacking in bravery. They just think you're a pretentious jerk with an attitude problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes people are even brave enough to ask.....The rest are not lacking in bravery .
They just think you 're a pretentious jerk with an attitude problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes people are even brave enough to ask.....The rest are not lacking in bravery.
They just think you're a pretentious jerk with an attitude problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563040</id>
	<title>Old People</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269187320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, in my office the only people who print things are people over 40.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , in my office the only people who print things are people over 40 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, in my office the only people who print things are people over 40.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564786</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269253680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to work at a call centre for a major UK bank.  We continually lost paper documents in our filing system.  It was a nightmare - sometimes we'd be on a call, and go running off to racks of files trying to find a customer's loan application.  Every now and then, someone would sit down and look through thousands of files to see if they could discover any of the missing papers.</p><p>Not long after I left, I met someone who worked for another major bank.  They told me that as documents arrived at their call centre, everything was scanned and then the originals were stored.  This took place in a secure basement, and the paper documents never made it to the call centre floor.  As a result, they never lost a document they received and everything was available to everyone onscreen at all times.</p><p>So the paperless office can and does work, where used appropriately.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to work at a call centre for a major UK bank .
We continually lost paper documents in our filing system .
It was a nightmare - sometimes we 'd be on a call , and go running off to racks of files trying to find a customer 's loan application .
Every now and then , someone would sit down and look through thousands of files to see if they could discover any of the missing papers.Not long after I left , I met someone who worked for another major bank .
They told me that as documents arrived at their call centre , everything was scanned and then the originals were stored .
This took place in a secure basement , and the paper documents never made it to the call centre floor .
As a result , they never lost a document they received and everything was available to everyone onscreen at all times.So the paperless office can and does work , where used appropriately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to work at a call centre for a major UK bank.
We continually lost paper documents in our filing system.
It was a nightmare - sometimes we'd be on a call, and go running off to racks of files trying to find a customer's loan application.
Every now and then, someone would sit down and look through thousands of files to see if they could discover any of the missing papers.Not long after I left, I met someone who worked for another major bank.
They told me that as documents arrived at their call centre, everything was scanned and then the originals were stored.
This took place in a secure basement, and the paper documents never made it to the call centre floor.
As a result, they never lost a document they received and everything was available to everyone onscreen at all times.So the paperless office can and does work, where used appropriately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561680</id>
	<title>Because its still vaporware.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269177060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What would it take for me to go paperless in my job?</p><p>I need 3 different devices, each should be able to do anything the smaller versions can do.  They should be weather proof, petrolium products proof, easily survive rough handling, light enough to hold in one hand, have a battery pack that can last at least eight hours of continuous use, be wireless, be readable in any light condition, and have software that let's me take notes, text, email, search the web, conduct word searches in documents, and the ability to trace and highlight system and circuit paths.</p><p>The first needs to be the size of a small note pad, specifically for reading off checklists and instructions on how to conduct a specific job.</p><p>The second needs to be letter sized.  Specifically for managing jobs, shifts, personnel, running reports, and taking notes during meetings.</p><p>The third needs to be legal size or larger.  Specifically for use building or troubleshooting with system and wiring schematics.</p><p>Now once you have those magically devices ready to go.  I need to have every single portal, training site, management site, historical records site, scheduling site, and basic computer access to have a common logon with access to a shared and private drive, a roaming profile, and have all those use 100\% compatable file types, and if you could be so kind to have a hiearchy structure built in that lets anyone who needs to have access to data do so, without any effort on my part.</p><p>Or I could just print this form out for my boss on letter sized, sign it, and drop it in his in-box and get back to work seeing as I'll probably be dead before the tech world even comes close to the above.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What would it take for me to go paperless in my job ? I need 3 different devices , each should be able to do anything the smaller versions can do .
They should be weather proof , petrolium products proof , easily survive rough handling , light enough to hold in one hand , have a battery pack that can last at least eight hours of continuous use , be wireless , be readable in any light condition , and have software that let 's me take notes , text , email , search the web , conduct word searches in documents , and the ability to trace and highlight system and circuit paths.The first needs to be the size of a small note pad , specifically for reading off checklists and instructions on how to conduct a specific job.The second needs to be letter sized .
Specifically for managing jobs , shifts , personnel , running reports , and taking notes during meetings.The third needs to be legal size or larger .
Specifically for use building or troubleshooting with system and wiring schematics.Now once you have those magically devices ready to go .
I need to have every single portal , training site , management site , historical records site , scheduling site , and basic computer access to have a common logon with access to a shared and private drive , a roaming profile , and have all those use 100 \ % compatable file types , and if you could be so kind to have a hiearchy structure built in that lets anyone who needs to have access to data do so , without any effort on my part.Or I could just print this form out for my boss on letter sized , sign it , and drop it in his in-box and get back to work seeing as I 'll probably be dead before the tech world even comes close to the above .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would it take for me to go paperless in my job?I need 3 different devices, each should be able to do anything the smaller versions can do.
They should be weather proof, petrolium products proof, easily survive rough handling, light enough to hold in one hand, have a battery pack that can last at least eight hours of continuous use, be wireless, be readable in any light condition, and have software that let's me take notes, text, email, search the web, conduct word searches in documents, and the ability to trace and highlight system and circuit paths.The first needs to be the size of a small note pad, specifically for reading off checklists and instructions on how to conduct a specific job.The second needs to be letter sized.
Specifically for managing jobs, shifts, personnel, running reports, and taking notes during meetings.The third needs to be legal size or larger.
Specifically for use building or troubleshooting with system and wiring schematics.Now once you have those magically devices ready to go.
I need to have every single portal, training site, management site, historical records site, scheduling site, and basic computer access to have a common logon with access to a shared and private drive, a roaming profile, and have all those use 100\% compatable file types, and if you could be so kind to have a hiearchy structure built in that lets anyone who needs to have access to data do so, without any effort on my part.Or I could just print this form out for my boss on letter sized, sign it, and drop it in his in-box and get back to work seeing as I'll probably be dead before the tech world even comes close to the above.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564114</id>
	<title>One Word: Printer.</title>
	<author>bronney</author>
	<datestamp>1269198900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's what holding us back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's what holding us back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's what holding us back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560582</id>
	<title>Almost there</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1269168780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My office has been almost, about 99\%, paperless for 20 years. The paper I have is incoming things. For the last decade or so I've been scanning in those incoming docs which has further reduced my paper. Outgoing PDFs help too. It is doable.</p><p>Realize that paper is not made from prime wood. It's the junk. We do sustainable forestry on our family farm. The good stuff goes to veneer, cabinetry, lumber and such. Next is firewood. Wood pulp for making paper is the sweepings but there is a lot of that in order to thin the crops of trees to produce high grade wood. Wood is a very long term farm crop. What we tend now we'll harvest in 30 to 50 years.</p><p>Keep recycling those electrons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My office has been almost , about 99 \ % , paperless for 20 years .
The paper I have is incoming things .
For the last decade or so I 've been scanning in those incoming docs which has further reduced my paper .
Outgoing PDFs help too .
It is doable.Realize that paper is not made from prime wood .
It 's the junk .
We do sustainable forestry on our family farm .
The good stuff goes to veneer , cabinetry , lumber and such .
Next is firewood .
Wood pulp for making paper is the sweepings but there is a lot of that in order to thin the crops of trees to produce high grade wood .
Wood is a very long term farm crop .
What we tend now we 'll harvest in 30 to 50 years.Keep recycling those electrons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My office has been almost, about 99\%, paperless for 20 years.
The paper I have is incoming things.
For the last decade or so I've been scanning in those incoming docs which has further reduced my paper.
Outgoing PDFs help too.
It is doable.Realize that paper is not made from prime wood.
It's the junk.
We do sustainable forestry on our family farm.
The good stuff goes to veneer, cabinetry, lumber and such.
Next is firewood.
Wood pulp for making paper is the sweepings but there is a lot of that in order to thin the crops of trees to produce high grade wood.
Wood is a very long term farm crop.
What we tend now we'll harvest in 30 to 50 years.Keep recycling those electrons.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561898</id>
	<title>generations</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269178620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a paperless office cannot and will not happen in our generation. if it is to inevitably happen, it will be by the children of today who didn't grow up with as big of a reliance on paper as us (and i'm saying this as a twenty year old.) you can't get an old dog to learn these new tricks.<br>besides, all of the plastics and such used to make technology is much more toxic to the environment than a stack of paper. just saying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a paperless office can not and will not happen in our generation .
if it is to inevitably happen , it will be by the children of today who did n't grow up with as big of a reliance on paper as us ( and i 'm saying this as a twenty year old .
) you ca n't get an old dog to learn these new tricks.besides , all of the plastics and such used to make technology is much more toxic to the environment than a stack of paper .
just saying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a paperless office cannot and will not happen in our generation.
if it is to inevitably happen, it will be by the children of today who didn't grow up with as big of a reliance on paper as us (and i'm saying this as a twenty year old.
) you can't get an old dog to learn these new tricks.besides, all of the plastics and such used to make technology is much more toxic to the environment than a stack of paper.
just saying.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564440</id>
	<title>Highly regulated industries</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269290400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Working in a highly regulated field like medical technology requires some level of paper documentation to satisfy regulatory agencies. With that said, our company DOES utilize software quite extensively for reviews, approvals and internal documentation. It's just not currently possible to eliminate 100\% of paper-based tasks.</p><p>Plus, many countries require printed documentation for medical devices, so dead-tree manuals are still a requirement to market most medical devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Working in a highly regulated field like medical technology requires some level of paper documentation to satisfy regulatory agencies .
With that said , our company DOES utilize software quite extensively for reviews , approvals and internal documentation .
It 's just not currently possible to eliminate 100 \ % of paper-based tasks.Plus , many countries require printed documentation for medical devices , so dead-tree manuals are still a requirement to market most medical devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Working in a highly regulated field like medical technology requires some level of paper documentation to satisfy regulatory agencies.
With that said, our company DOES utilize software quite extensively for reviews, approvals and internal documentation.
It's just not currently possible to eliminate 100\% of paper-based tasks.Plus, many countries require printed documentation for medical devices, so dead-tree manuals are still a requirement to market most medical devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559436</id>
	<title>Re:Display size</title>
	<author>Gorobei</author>
	<datestamp>1269204240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep.</p><p>I'm kind of old school, so I only have 3 monitors + a notepad, maybe get 1 piece of paper a week (a confirm for travel or whatever.)  More modern guys on the floor have 6, 7, or 8 21" flatscreens, zero paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep.I 'm kind of old school , so I only have 3 monitors + a notepad , maybe get 1 piece of paper a week ( a confirm for travel or whatever .
) More modern guys on the floor have 6 , 7 , or 8 21 " flatscreens , zero paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep.I'm kind of old school, so I only have 3 monitors + a notepad, maybe get 1 piece of paper a week (a confirm for travel or whatever.
)  More modern guys on the floor have 6, 7, or 8 21" flatscreens, zero paper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31572742</id>
	<title>From a PC Technician perspective...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269285600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you let someone know what they need to do to login to a computer if they have never logged in before and they start an hour before you get in, but you're the only technician on staff?</p><p>People that think of setting up paperless offices forget that instructions are sometimes needed just to use the technology that is needed to be paperless. I do not believe it is possible to truly be paperless, but there are always ways to improve.</p><p>As an example, I have to attend a meeting once a week from a location away from my desk but have to have 2 documents with me that I recieve electronically. One of them is a PDF and the other is a Word doc. Since my computer is a tower PC, I have to print the documents to have them with me for the meeting. If I had a laptop or purchase something such as the upcoming iPad, I would be able to eliminate the need to print 2 documents a week saving over 100 sheets of paper a year. Now if everyone that attended the same meeting was able to do the same, we could save over a thousand sheets a year (2 reams) and this is just one group in a much larger department of a global company. It adds up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you let someone know what they need to do to login to a computer if they have never logged in before and they start an hour before you get in , but you 're the only technician on staff ? People that think of setting up paperless offices forget that instructions are sometimes needed just to use the technology that is needed to be paperless .
I do not believe it is possible to truly be paperless , but there are always ways to improve.As an example , I have to attend a meeting once a week from a location away from my desk but have to have 2 documents with me that I recieve electronically .
One of them is a PDF and the other is a Word doc .
Since my computer is a tower PC , I have to print the documents to have them with me for the meeting .
If I had a laptop or purchase something such as the upcoming iPad , I would be able to eliminate the need to print 2 documents a week saving over 100 sheets of paper a year .
Now if everyone that attended the same meeting was able to do the same , we could save over a thousand sheets a year ( 2 reams ) and this is just one group in a much larger department of a global company .
It adds up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you let someone know what they need to do to login to a computer if they have never logged in before and they start an hour before you get in, but you're the only technician on staff?People that think of setting up paperless offices forget that instructions are sometimes needed just to use the technology that is needed to be paperless.
I do not believe it is possible to truly be paperless, but there are always ways to improve.As an example, I have to attend a meeting once a week from a location away from my desk but have to have 2 documents with me that I recieve electronically.
One of them is a PDF and the other is a Word doc.
Since my computer is a tower PC, I have to print the documents to have them with me for the meeting.
If I had a laptop or purchase something such as the upcoming iPad, I would be able to eliminate the need to print 2 documents a week saving over 100 sheets of paper a year.
Now if everyone that attended the same meeting was able to do the same, we could save over a thousand sheets a year (2 reams) and this is just one group in a much larger department of a global company.
It adds up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560244</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269166500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you tried holding it upside-down and shaking it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you tried holding it upside-down and shaking it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you tried holding it upside-down and shaking it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332</id>
	<title>Reliability</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1269203460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it.  Contrast that to Windows.</p><p>When push comes to shove, I can always get a paper form to the person that needs it.  Contrast that to relying on an Exchange server.</p><p>When a form needs authorization, having the right person sign it with a pen always works.  Contrast that to trying to get digital signatures to work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never had my desk crash , losing all pieces of paper on it .
Contrast that to Windows.When push comes to shove , I can always get a paper form to the person that needs it .
Contrast that to relying on an Exchange server.When a form needs authorization , having the right person sign it with a pen always works .
Contrast that to trying to get digital signatures to work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it.
Contrast that to Windows.When push comes to shove, I can always get a paper form to the person that needs it.
Contrast that to relying on an Exchange server.When a form needs authorization, having the right person sign it with a pen always works.
Contrast that to trying to get digital signatures to work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562774</id>
	<title>Less Paper Office</title>
	<author>kenwd0elq</author>
	<datestamp>1269184980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work in the document imaging division of a copier company, so we've got you covered both ways. We'll sell you a printer or a copier if you like paper, and scanners if you don't.  Here's how this can work in practice.
<p>1.  You're a law firm or an accountant.  Clients come in for meetings.  You print your document, and get a signature.  We scan the document to an indexing document management system, and the client takes the paper original away with them.  We have the scanned image, and if we ever need it, we can print it THEN.  After all, a modern copier is just a computer connected to a scanner and a printer;  we store the image so that the time between scanning and printing can be months instead of seconds.  Same process.
</p><p>2.  You're a medical group with several offices. People bring you forms.  We scan the form into the document management system and the patient keeps the original.  If the patient visits a different office tomorrow, it won't really matter - because their records are on the server. Come back here, come back there, come back next day or next year - your records are on the server.  (None of this "cloud" crap;  that's a recipe for disaster!)
</p><p>
The point is, paper isn't going anywhere, because paper is so darned useful!  It's easier to create and edit documents on paper,. and if you need to go somewhere else, paper is the perfect medium.  But when you're done with it, scan it and shred it.  One should never STORE paper documents!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in the document imaging division of a copier company , so we 've got you covered both ways .
We 'll sell you a printer or a copier if you like paper , and scanners if you do n't .
Here 's how this can work in practice .
1. You 're a law firm or an accountant .
Clients come in for meetings .
You print your document , and get a signature .
We scan the document to an indexing document management system , and the client takes the paper original away with them .
We have the scanned image , and if we ever need it , we can print it THEN .
After all , a modern copier is just a computer connected to a scanner and a printer ; we store the image so that the time between scanning and printing can be months instead of seconds .
Same process .
2. You 're a medical group with several offices .
People bring you forms .
We scan the form into the document management system and the patient keeps the original .
If the patient visits a different office tomorrow , it wo n't really matter - because their records are on the server .
Come back here , come back there , come back next day or next year - your records are on the server .
( None of this " cloud " crap ; that 's a recipe for disaster !
) The point is , paper is n't going anywhere , because paper is so darned useful !
It 's easier to create and edit documents on paper, .
and if you need to go somewhere else , paper is the perfect medium .
But when you 're done with it , scan it and shred it .
One should never STORE paper documents !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in the document imaging division of a copier company, so we've got you covered both ways.
We'll sell you a printer or a copier if you like paper, and scanners if you don't.
Here's how this can work in practice.
1.  You're a law firm or an accountant.
Clients come in for meetings.
You print your document, and get a signature.
We scan the document to an indexing document management system, and the client takes the paper original away with them.
We have the scanned image, and if we ever need it, we can print it THEN.
After all, a modern copier is just a computer connected to a scanner and a printer;  we store the image so that the time between scanning and printing can be months instead of seconds.
Same process.
2.  You're a medical group with several offices.
People bring you forms.
We scan the form into the document management system and the patient keeps the original.
If the patient visits a different office tomorrow, it won't really matter - because their records are on the server.
Come back here, come back there, come back next day or next year - your records are on the server.
(None of this "cloud" crap;  that's a recipe for disaster!
)

The point is, paper isn't going anywhere, because paper is so darned useful!
It's easier to create and edit documents on paper,.
and if you need to go somewhere else, paper is the perfect medium.
But when you're done with it, scan it and shred it.
One should never STORE paper documents!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561210</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269172920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Instead of...hand (just use your other hand for eating)</p></div><p>Works wonderfully in a country where public urination in the street is still commonplace. India, for the unaware. Do you want to be on the same level as third world India?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of...hand ( just use your other hand for eating ) Works wonderfully in a country where public urination in the street is still commonplace .
India , for the unaware .
Do you want to be on the same level as third world India ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of...hand (just use your other hand for eating)Works wonderfully in a country where public urination in the street is still commonplace.
India, for the unaware.
Do you want to be on the same level as third world India?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563788</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>Daengbo</author>
	<datestamp>1269194220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you ever heard of Google Docs? <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3DjLIzuDYE" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">Watch the video</a> [youtube.com] ("made easy").</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever heard of Google Docs ?
Watch the video [ youtube.com ] ( " made easy " ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever heard of Google Docs?
Watch the video [youtube.com] ("made easy").</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559514</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't entirely the truth anymore.  I work for several medical facilities.  To comply with law, you have to have all of your medical records in a digital format.  The hospitals that I use have completely ditched paper except for the purpose of handing the patient a receipt.  Every medical station, every room has a computer in it that employees can use to document patient care and progress.  They use screens located at nursing stations.  It is getting to the point that you don't get paid unless all of your records are medical.</p><p>The only exception to this rule is a vet clinic that I work for.  They are still mostly paper.  This has more to do with management's unwillingness to learn "the computer".  They do realize that if they ever want to sell the place, they are going to have to go all digital.  Every now and then they make an effort to make the change, but it gets difficult since the people that run the place actually can't stand working on computers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't entirely the truth anymore .
I work for several medical facilities .
To comply with law , you have to have all of your medical records in a digital format .
The hospitals that I use have completely ditched paper except for the purpose of handing the patient a receipt .
Every medical station , every room has a computer in it that employees can use to document patient care and progress .
They use screens located at nursing stations .
It is getting to the point that you do n't get paid unless all of your records are medical.The only exception to this rule is a vet clinic that I work for .
They are still mostly paper .
This has more to do with management 's unwillingness to learn " the computer " .
They do realize that if they ever want to sell the place , they are going to have to go all digital .
Every now and then they make an effort to make the change , but it gets difficult since the people that run the place actually ca n't stand working on computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't entirely the truth anymore.
I work for several medical facilities.
To comply with law, you have to have all of your medical records in a digital format.
The hospitals that I use have completely ditched paper except for the purpose of handing the patient a receipt.
Every medical station, every room has a computer in it that employees can use to document patient care and progress.
They use screens located at nursing stations.
It is getting to the point that you don't get paid unless all of your records are medical.The only exception to this rule is a vet clinic that I work for.
They are still mostly paper.
This has more to do with management's unwillingness to learn "the computer".
They do realize that if they ever want to sell the place, they are going to have to go all digital.
Every now and then they make an effort to make the change, but it gets difficult since the people that run the place actually can't stand working on computers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31585416</id>
	<title>Re:Word Processors are holding us back...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269365880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The answer to most of those problems: Google Docs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The answer to most of those problems : Google Docs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The answer to most of those problems: Google Docs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560268</id>
	<title>Re:Prices &amp; UI...</title>
	<author>painandgreed</author>
	<datestamp>1269166560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>At ~1 cent per page, how many reams of paper would it take to pay off a single tablet/eBook reader for a single person?
Answer: "Too many"</i> </p><p>But there are other benefits from going paperless, one being time. time saved from printing things. Time saved moving bits of paper around the office. Time saved looking for that bit of paper that was supposed to be on somebodies desk but isn't. I work in Radiology Healthcare and despite people telling us that we couldn't go filmless, we did it, so we have ignored the people that are telling us we can't go paperless and doing well. Our reqs get faxed to our fax server. The schedulers bring them up on their computer and schedule the exams from the digital req which is now associated with that exam. From there it goes directly to the queue of a doctor, sometimes in another building, to protocol. Once protocoled, it goes to the radtech's queue to have the exam preformed. This all regularly happens in a time quicker that it would have taken the scheduler to walk over to the fax machine and get the paper requisition to begin with. The req doesn't get lost and is available to anybody at anytime in the process with the click of a button. </p><p>Radiology has some pretty nice systems built to do all this, and we had to give a good number of people dual monitors (but monitors are cheap and even the cheapo computers we buy are ready for dual monitor support these days). However, the number of printers we have is half what it was several years ago and they break down less often because they get used less. That's less support I have to do. We also got rid of sticker printers. Those were even worse. We still have to print for this or that but our main workflow is paperless. I suspect that the main reasons that offices can't go paperless is inertia of the people who don't want to, poor workflow, and insufficent tools to do so rather than any actual cost or usefullness of paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At ~ 1 cent per page , how many reams of paper would it take to pay off a single tablet/eBook reader for a single person ?
Answer : " Too many " But there are other benefits from going paperless , one being time .
time saved from printing things .
Time saved moving bits of paper around the office .
Time saved looking for that bit of paper that was supposed to be on somebodies desk but is n't .
I work in Radiology Healthcare and despite people telling us that we could n't go filmless , we did it , so we have ignored the people that are telling us we ca n't go paperless and doing well .
Our reqs get faxed to our fax server .
The schedulers bring them up on their computer and schedule the exams from the digital req which is now associated with that exam .
From there it goes directly to the queue of a doctor , sometimes in another building , to protocol .
Once protocoled , it goes to the radtech 's queue to have the exam preformed .
This all regularly happens in a time quicker that it would have taken the scheduler to walk over to the fax machine and get the paper requisition to begin with .
The req does n't get lost and is available to anybody at anytime in the process with the click of a button .
Radiology has some pretty nice systems built to do all this , and we had to give a good number of people dual monitors ( but monitors are cheap and even the cheapo computers we buy are ready for dual monitor support these days ) .
However , the number of printers we have is half what it was several years ago and they break down less often because they get used less .
That 's less support I have to do .
We also got rid of sticker printers .
Those were even worse .
We still have to print for this or that but our main workflow is paperless .
I suspect that the main reasons that offices ca n't go paperless is inertia of the people who do n't want to , poor workflow , and insufficent tools to do so rather than any actual cost or usefullness of paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> At ~1 cent per page, how many reams of paper would it take to pay off a single tablet/eBook reader for a single person?
Answer: "Too many" But there are other benefits from going paperless, one being time.
time saved from printing things.
Time saved moving bits of paper around the office.
Time saved looking for that bit of paper that was supposed to be on somebodies desk but isn't.
I work in Radiology Healthcare and despite people telling us that we couldn't go filmless, we did it, so we have ignored the people that are telling us we can't go paperless and doing well.
Our reqs get faxed to our fax server.
The schedulers bring them up on their computer and schedule the exams from the digital req which is now associated with that exam.
From there it goes directly to the queue of a doctor, sometimes in another building, to protocol.
Once protocoled, it goes to the radtech's queue to have the exam preformed.
This all regularly happens in a time quicker that it would have taken the scheduler to walk over to the fax machine and get the paper requisition to begin with.
The req doesn't get lost and is available to anybody at anytime in the process with the click of a button.
Radiology has some pretty nice systems built to do all this, and we had to give a good number of people dual monitors (but monitors are cheap and even the cheapo computers we buy are ready for dual monitor support these days).
However, the number of printers we have is half what it was several years ago and they break down less often because they get used less.
That's less support I have to do.
We also got rid of sticker printers.
Those were even worse.
We still have to print for this or that but our main workflow is paperless.
I suspect that the main reasons that offices can't go paperless is inertia of the people who don't want to, poor workflow, and insufficent tools to do so rather than any actual cost or usefullness of paper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560434</id>
	<title>Signatures</title>
	<author>optimus2861</author>
	<datestamp>1269167580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When you've got a legal document that needs to be signed, dated, and potentially witnessed, there's no other sure-fire, legally-binding way to do it besides putting pen to paper. After that's done you can scan in the now-signed document, provide copies to those who need it, but that original one, with the original ink, is the one you want when TSHTF.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When you 've got a legal document that needs to be signed , dated , and potentially witnessed , there 's no other sure-fire , legally-binding way to do it besides putting pen to paper .
After that 's done you can scan in the now-signed document , provide copies to those who need it , but that original one , with the original ink , is the one you want when TSHTF .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you've got a legal document that needs to be signed, dated, and potentially witnessed, there's no other sure-fire, legally-binding way to do it besides putting pen to paper.
After that's done you can scan in the now-signed document, provide copies to those who need it, but that original one, with the original ink, is the one you want when TSHTF.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561970</id>
	<title>Re:A couple of things</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1269179100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some of the reasons I don't use paper much anymore:<br>1. <b>Ctrl + F, Ctrl + C, Ctrl + V</b> - A slip of a digit can mean hours of lost work.<br>2. <b>Readability</b> - Not many have good handwriting.<br>3. <b>Tracking</b> - It takes me just as little time to find a 6 month old document as it does a 1 day old document.<br>4. <b>Copying</b> - When new people are brought on the project it's easy to get them what they need.<br>5. <b>Accessibility</b> - My desktop, my laptop, my home computers, and my cell phone can all access these docs.<br>6. <b>Physical storage</b> - I think any of you that have worked with somebody that requires paper <i>everything</i> understands this one intuitively.</p><p>Previously I worked at places where I'd end up after a year or two being the proud owner of huge stacks of papers and my own Radar-esque filing systems.  Where I work now, we have reliable internet connections and have taken advantage of several of the services available to us.  The people in charge are diligent about sending us clear emails of our goals and we have appropriate documents delivered to us in digital formats. Even when on-paper stuff is delivered to us, the first thing it happens is it's thrown on the scanner.   We mainly use paper for doodling.  There is a lot of untapped flexibility in the digital world and it doesn't take much to adapt to it.</p><p>Oh, and here's an interesting tidbit of info:  The amount of "that's not was asked for!" blow-ups is waaaaaaaaay down.  Personally, I think the paper-less is a main contributor to that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of the reasons I do n't use paper much anymore : 1 .
Ctrl + F , Ctrl + C , Ctrl + V - A slip of a digit can mean hours of lost work.2 .
Readability - Not many have good handwriting.3 .
Tracking - It takes me just as little time to find a 6 month old document as it does a 1 day old document.4 .
Copying - When new people are brought on the project it 's easy to get them what they need.5 .
Accessibility - My desktop , my laptop , my home computers , and my cell phone can all access these docs.6 .
Physical storage - I think any of you that have worked with somebody that requires paper everything understands this one intuitively.Previously I worked at places where I 'd end up after a year or two being the proud owner of huge stacks of papers and my own Radar-esque filing systems .
Where I work now , we have reliable internet connections and have taken advantage of several of the services available to us .
The people in charge are diligent about sending us clear emails of our goals and we have appropriate documents delivered to us in digital formats .
Even when on-paper stuff is delivered to us , the first thing it happens is it 's thrown on the scanner .
We mainly use paper for doodling .
There is a lot of untapped flexibility in the digital world and it does n't take much to adapt to it.Oh , and here 's an interesting tidbit of info : The amount of " that 's not was asked for !
" blow-ups is waaaaaaaaay down .
Personally , I think the paper-less is a main contributor to that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of the reasons I don't use paper much anymore:1.
Ctrl + F, Ctrl + C, Ctrl + V - A slip of a digit can mean hours of lost work.2.
Readability - Not many have good handwriting.3.
Tracking - It takes me just as little time to find a 6 month old document as it does a 1 day old document.4.
Copying - When new people are brought on the project it's easy to get them what they need.5.
Accessibility - My desktop, my laptop, my home computers, and my cell phone can all access these docs.6.
Physical storage - I think any of you that have worked with somebody that requires paper everything understands this one intuitively.Previously I worked at places where I'd end up after a year or two being the proud owner of huge stacks of papers and my own Radar-esque filing systems.
Where I work now, we have reliable internet connections and have taken advantage of several of the services available to us.
The people in charge are diligent about sending us clear emails of our goals and we have appropriate documents delivered to us in digital formats.
Even when on-paper stuff is delivered to us, the first thing it happens is it's thrown on the scanner.
We mainly use paper for doodling.
There is a lot of untapped flexibility in the digital world and it doesn't take much to adapt to it.Oh, and here's an interesting tidbit of info:  The amount of "that's not was asked for!
" blow-ups is waaaaaaaaay down.
Personally, I think the paper-less is a main contributor to that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560278</id>
	<title>Business Logic vs Presentation</title>
	<author>pcardno</author>
	<datestamp>1269166680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the same way we try to divide the business logic layer from the presentation layer in systems design, when I'm drawing pictures on paper to explain things to someone, I want to get my point across (the business logic) without worrying what it looks like. If I try to do it on Powerpoint, I worry about colours, positioning and getting the presentation right first time rather than just letting the logic flow.</p><p>A computer screen and a drawing tool will never beat a bit of A3 paper and the ability to scribble and talk around it while people you work with can do the same..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the same way we try to divide the business logic layer from the presentation layer in systems design , when I 'm drawing pictures on paper to explain things to someone , I want to get my point across ( the business logic ) without worrying what it looks like .
If I try to do it on Powerpoint , I worry about colours , positioning and getting the presentation right first time rather than just letting the logic flow.A computer screen and a drawing tool will never beat a bit of A3 paper and the ability to scribble and talk around it while people you work with can do the same. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the same way we try to divide the business logic layer from the presentation layer in systems design, when I'm drawing pictures on paper to explain things to someone, I want to get my point across (the business logic) without worrying what it looks like.
If I try to do it on Powerpoint, I worry about colours, positioning and getting the presentation right first time rather than just letting the logic flow.A computer screen and a drawing tool will never beat a bit of A3 paper and the ability to scribble and talk around it while people you work with can do the same..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559736</id>
	<title>Size</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269163200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a municipal engineer. The normal sheet I work with the a ARCH-D (24x36") but last week I plotted a 9-metre long roll so I could review the road profile of a road I am rebuilding. We use large dual computer screens for our CAD work, but even then they are too small to see the big picture all at once.</p><p>It's amazing how much paper our office goes though. But until we get big wall sized displays that is the way it is going to be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a municipal engineer .
The normal sheet I work with the a ARCH-D ( 24x36 " ) but last week I plotted a 9-metre long roll so I could review the road profile of a road I am rebuilding .
We use large dual computer screens for our CAD work , but even then they are too small to see the big picture all at once.It 's amazing how much paper our office goes though .
But until we get big wall sized displays that is the way it is going to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a municipal engineer.
The normal sheet I work with the a ARCH-D (24x36") but last week I plotted a 9-metre long roll so I could review the road profile of a road I am rebuilding.
We use large dual computer screens for our CAD work, but even then they are too small to see the big picture all at once.It's amazing how much paper our office goes though.
But until we get big wall sized displays that is the way it is going to be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559520</id>
	<title>Fax Machines (and the people who insist on using)</title>
	<author>mavantix</author>
	<datestamp>1269204780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Working in IT, I hate fax machines. They're archaic technology, long sense replaced, but try and argue the point to an employee who believes they are the only HIPAA compliant way to sent information to another doctors office. Uhhg. I can't tell you how many times I've seen someone print something out to shove it in a fax machine and then shred it, and yes, there's a digital fax printer setup on the network and they know how to use it. Stubborn employees and the lack of management to enforce them to migrate to better technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Working in IT , I hate fax machines .
They 're archaic technology , long sense replaced , but try and argue the point to an employee who believes they are the only HIPAA compliant way to sent information to another doctors office .
Uhhg. I ca n't tell you how many times I 've seen someone print something out to shove it in a fax machine and then shred it , and yes , there 's a digital fax printer setup on the network and they know how to use it .
Stubborn employees and the lack of management to enforce them to migrate to better technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Working in IT, I hate fax machines.
They're archaic technology, long sense replaced, but try and argue the point to an employee who believes they are the only HIPAA compliant way to sent information to another doctors office.
Uhhg. I can't tell you how many times I've seen someone print something out to shove it in a fax machine and then shred it, and yes, there's a digital fax printer setup on the network and they know how to use it.
Stubborn employees and the lack of management to enforce them to migrate to better technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</id>
	<title>Resistance Of Change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269203700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work in an office with 200+ cubes.  We have all the latest office productivity tools. 99\% of the employees have 10-30 yellow stickys stuck all over their desk for reminders.  People seem somehow amazed and awestruck by my clean and streamlined desk that is clutter free and yellow sticky free.  Sometimes people are even brave enough to ask "how do you do it? How do you work without...  stickys??!!".  I tell them about this technological miracle that was recently invented (years ago) called Outlook.  Features include calendar with reminders and even... a task list!  Amazed... my coworkers usually run back to their desk to place another yellow sticky on top of a recently expiring yellow sticky, that says "reminder, learn about outlook tool".  I feel like I'm surrounded by spear-chuckers</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in an office with 200 + cubes .
We have all the latest office productivity tools .
99 \ % of the employees have 10-30 yellow stickys stuck all over their desk for reminders .
People seem somehow amazed and awestruck by my clean and streamlined desk that is clutter free and yellow sticky free .
Sometimes people are even brave enough to ask " how do you do it ?
How do you work without.. .
stickys ? ? ! ! " . I tell them about this technological miracle that was recently invented ( years ago ) called Outlook .
Features include calendar with reminders and even... a task list !
Amazed... my coworkers usually run back to their desk to place another yellow sticky on top of a recently expiring yellow sticky , that says " reminder , learn about outlook tool " .
I feel like I 'm surrounded by spear-chuckers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in an office with 200+ cubes.
We have all the latest office productivity tools.
99\% of the employees have 10-30 yellow stickys stuck all over their desk for reminders.
People seem somehow amazed and awestruck by my clean and streamlined desk that is clutter free and yellow sticky free.
Sometimes people are even brave enough to ask "how do you do it?
How do you work without...
stickys??!!".  I tell them about this technological miracle that was recently invented (years ago) called Outlook.
Features include calendar with reminders and even... a task list!
Amazed... my coworkers usually run back to their desk to place another yellow sticky on top of a recently expiring yellow sticky, that says "reminder, learn about outlook tool".
I feel like I'm surrounded by spear-chuckers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563676</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>DVega</author>
	<datestamp>1269193080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>"A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet. Some things would be impractical..."</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>
Let me introduce you to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bidet" title="wikipedia.org">The Bidet</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet .
Some things would be impractical... " Let me introduce you to The Bidet [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet.
Some things would be impractical..." 
Let me introduce you to The Bidet [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559732</id>
	<title>i think is very simply</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269163200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First: Education, normal people don't know how to use electronic devices (computers, card readers, mouses, touchable screens, barcodes, etc.) in general. We have been teached to use paper from child and we are teached from fools how to use computers.</p><p>Second: Money, using paper documents are cheaper than electronic documents, not for the support but because the manipulation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First : Education , normal people do n't know how to use electronic devices ( computers , card readers , mouses , touchable screens , barcodes , etc .
) in general .
We have been teached to use paper from child and we are teached from fools how to use computers.Second : Money , using paper documents are cheaper than electronic documents , not for the support but because the manipulation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First: Education, normal people don't know how to use electronic devices (computers, card readers, mouses, touchable screens, barcodes, etc.
) in general.
We have been teached to use paper from child and we are teached from fools how to use computers.Second: Money, using paper documents are cheaper than electronic documents, not for the support but because the manipulation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31568100</id>
	<title>Another</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269272100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another great discussion topic for worthless people with time on their hands.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another great discussion topic for worthless people with time on their hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another great discussion topic for worthless people with time on their hands.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563492</id>
	<title>Workflows</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269191640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think most posts have mentioned it in different ways, but the biggest issue I have seen is the need to change the internal business workflows along with the technology.  Most attempts I have seen just throw the technology in and expect things to just work out.  In those cases the technology became used for digital archiving rather than a paperless transition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think most posts have mentioned it in different ways , but the biggest issue I have seen is the need to change the internal business workflows along with the technology .
Most attempts I have seen just throw the technology in and expect things to just work out .
In those cases the technology became used for digital archiving rather than a paperless transition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think most posts have mentioned it in different ways, but the biggest issue I have seen is the need to change the internal business workflows along with the technology.
Most attempts I have seen just throw the technology in and expect things to just work out.
In those cases the technology became used for digital archiving rather than a paperless transition.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561740</id>
	<title>Copyright holds back the paperless</title>
	<author>bzipitidoo</author>
	<datestamp>1269177600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... library and the paperless office.  I'm surprised no one has mentioned copyright yet.  That, and small display screens, and awkward methods of transferring documents.  Email attachments just aren't as neat as handing someone a few papers.

</p><p>Libraries ought to digitize everything, but they can't thanks to copyright law.   Best they're allowed is online catalogs.  If libraries were digital, there'd be no more multiple copies, late fees, limits on how many books patrons can check out at a time, returns, library cards, copy machines.  No more trudging to the stacks and rooting around to find what they have of the several dozen items you looked up in the catalog.  You'd just get the item itself in its entirety, not some Dewey Decimal catalog number.  No more hunting around because they didn't shelve it in the correct spot, or discovering that it's checked out, or that they don't carry enough back issues to cover the one you want, or that they do have the publication but some jerk ripped out the pages you want.

</p><p>And the mere act of libraries going digital would drive the creation of better access and transfer.  As it is, paper breeds paper.  The easiest way to copy a few pages is right back onto more paper!  There are copiers that can email scans of a document instead of producing more paper, but they're crude.  No OCR, just sends monster sized raster scans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... library and the paperless office .
I 'm surprised no one has mentioned copyright yet .
That , and small display screens , and awkward methods of transferring documents .
Email attachments just are n't as neat as handing someone a few papers .
Libraries ought to digitize everything , but they ca n't thanks to copyright law .
Best they 're allowed is online catalogs .
If libraries were digital , there 'd be no more multiple copies , late fees , limits on how many books patrons can check out at a time , returns , library cards , copy machines .
No more trudging to the stacks and rooting around to find what they have of the several dozen items you looked up in the catalog .
You 'd just get the item itself in its entirety , not some Dewey Decimal catalog number .
No more hunting around because they did n't shelve it in the correct spot , or discovering that it 's checked out , or that they do n't carry enough back issues to cover the one you want , or that they do have the publication but some jerk ripped out the pages you want .
And the mere act of libraries going digital would drive the creation of better access and transfer .
As it is , paper breeds paper .
The easiest way to copy a few pages is right back onto more paper !
There are copiers that can email scans of a document instead of producing more paper , but they 're crude .
No OCR , just sends monster sized raster scans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... library and the paperless office.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned copyright yet.
That, and small display screens, and awkward methods of transferring documents.
Email attachments just aren't as neat as handing someone a few papers.
Libraries ought to digitize everything, but they can't thanks to copyright law.
Best they're allowed is online catalogs.
If libraries were digital, there'd be no more multiple copies, late fees, limits on how many books patrons can check out at a time, returns, library cards, copy machines.
No more trudging to the stacks and rooting around to find what they have of the several dozen items you looked up in the catalog.
You'd just get the item itself in its entirety, not some Dewey Decimal catalog number.
No more hunting around because they didn't shelve it in the correct spot, or discovering that it's checked out, or that they don't carry enough back issues to cover the one you want, or that they do have the publication but some jerk ripped out the pages you want.
And the mere act of libraries going digital would drive the creation of better access and transfer.
As it is, paper breeds paper.
The easiest way to copy a few pages is right back onto more paper!
There are copiers that can email scans of a document instead of producing more paper, but they're crude.
No OCR, just sends monster sized raster scans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559746</id>
	<title>It all boils down to COVER YOUR ASS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269163260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paper is the only way to make sure that your ass is covered, without having to worry about it being compromised in storage.   Anything stored on a computer can be accessed by a skilled person, at which point it can be destroyed, altered or altered and moved to someplace you no longer control.</p><p>Paper can be taken to any bank or lawyers office to be permanently stored with a record of all accesses, which ratchets up the level of difficulty for anyone wanting to destroy or change it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper is the only way to make sure that your ass is covered , without having to worry about it being compromised in storage .
Anything stored on a computer can be accessed by a skilled person , at which point it can be destroyed , altered or altered and moved to someplace you no longer control.Paper can be taken to any bank or lawyers office to be permanently stored with a record of all accesses , which ratchets up the level of difficulty for anyone wanting to destroy or change it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper is the only way to make sure that your ass is covered, without having to worry about it being compromised in storage.
Anything stored on a computer can be accessed by a skilled person, at which point it can be destroyed, altered or altered and moved to someplace you no longer control.Paper can be taken to any bank or lawyers office to be permanently stored with a record of all accesses, which ratchets up the level of difficulty for anyone wanting to destroy or change it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559756</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>Jazz-Masta</author>
	<datestamp>1269163320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are a number of newer signature pads that record forensic data such as stroke length, pressure, lift points, etc as well as it has certain security to help identify genuine signatures or tampering. Most have plugins for PDFs.</p><p>I've used signature pads for banking, renting cars, and accepting packages.</p><p>What makes it difficult to implement is the APIs for some of these are not free/cheap, so implementing into, say, a car dealership's management system may not be economical at the moment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a number of newer signature pads that record forensic data such as stroke length , pressure , lift points , etc as well as it has certain security to help identify genuine signatures or tampering .
Most have plugins for PDFs.I 've used signature pads for banking , renting cars , and accepting packages.What makes it difficult to implement is the APIs for some of these are not free/cheap , so implementing into , say , a car dealership 's management system may not be economical at the moment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a number of newer signature pads that record forensic data such as stroke length, pressure, lift points, etc as well as it has certain security to help identify genuine signatures or tampering.
Most have plugins for PDFs.I've used signature pads for banking, renting cars, and accepting packages.What makes it difficult to implement is the APIs for some of these are not free/cheap, so implementing into, say, a car dealership's management system may not be economical at the moment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31567040</id>
	<title>Data Integrity  -- Historical Preservation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269269340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are some dangers to the paperless office.  Digital media in the long run is more volatile than paper.  As more and more data goes digital we may be robbing from future generations.  Formats change, disks go bad, hardware changes.  Even wihtout a major catastrophe like a solar flair or the break down of society, degradation of media such as CD's, magnetic tape back ups, and hard drives is relatively rapid compared to good old paper.  As long as a piece of data is continuously shifted and backed up across several medians it's fine but once day to day maintenance ends for a piece of digital data it starts to dye.  Then again will anyone really want to read your quarterly earnings 200 years from now?  Maybe it's good to forget.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some dangers to the paperless office .
Digital media in the long run is more volatile than paper .
As more and more data goes digital we may be robbing from future generations .
Formats change , disks go bad , hardware changes .
Even wihtout a major catastrophe like a solar flair or the break down of society , degradation of media such as CD 's , magnetic tape back ups , and hard drives is relatively rapid compared to good old paper .
As long as a piece of data is continuously shifted and backed up across several medians it 's fine but once day to day maintenance ends for a piece of digital data it starts to dye .
Then again will anyone really want to read your quarterly earnings 200 years from now ?
Maybe it 's good to forget .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some dangers to the paperless office.
Digital media in the long run is more volatile than paper.
As more and more data goes digital we may be robbing from future generations.
Formats change, disks go bad, hardware changes.
Even wihtout a major catastrophe like a solar flair or the break down of society, degradation of media such as CD's, magnetic tape back ups, and hard drives is relatively rapid compared to good old paper.
As long as a piece of data is continuously shifted and backed up across several medians it's fine but once day to day maintenance ends for a piece of digital data it starts to dye.
Then again will anyone really want to read your quarterly earnings 200 years from now?
Maybe it's good to forget.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559634</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>Twinbee</author>
	<datestamp>1269162420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's a real shame that they don't know how much time they'd all save.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a real shame that they do n't know how much time they 'd all save .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a real shame that they don't know how much time they'd all save.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559362</id>
	<title>It's necessary</title>
	<author>guytoronto</author>
	<datestamp>1269203820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Short of a fire, flood, or shredding, the documents in the filing cabinet aren't going anywhere.

Electromagnetic data storage is the devil's tool!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Short of a fire , flood , or shredding , the documents in the filing cabinet are n't going anywhere .
Electromagnetic data storage is the devil 's tool !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Short of a fire, flood, or shredding, the documents in the filing cabinet aren't going anywhere.
Electromagnetic data storage is the devil's tool!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560622</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1269169020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My windows never crash either, but I don't have windows in the office any more, only at home.  Of course, I don't put documents on my windows, and they're held in place by sturdy wood screws and caulk.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My windows never crash either , but I do n't have windows in the office any more , only at home .
Of course , I do n't put documents on my windows , and they 're held in place by sturdy wood screws and caulk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My windows never crash either, but I don't have windows in the office any more, only at home.
Of course, I don't put documents on my windows, and they're held in place by sturdy wood screws and caulk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559992</id>
	<title>Obvious</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1269164820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is no easy way yet to share the info with everyone in a way that allows them to write notes alongside the information in a cheap and dead easy way.
<br> <br>
Give people an e-ink solution that can be distributed to everyone instantly and allow them to write notes on top and paper will start going away.
<br> <br>
In an ideal world you could even have e-ink clients on a noteboard that get updates from a server so info can be passed to all employees without needing, for example, 10,000 iPad-like devices for people who don't really need them 99.99\% of the time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no easy way yet to share the info with everyone in a way that allows them to write notes alongside the information in a cheap and dead easy way .
Give people an e-ink solution that can be distributed to everyone instantly and allow them to write notes on top and paper will start going away .
In an ideal world you could even have e-ink clients on a noteboard that get updates from a server so info can be passed to all employees without needing , for example , 10,000 iPad-like devices for people who do n't really need them 99.99 \ % of the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no easy way yet to share the info with everyone in a way that allows them to write notes alongside the information in a cheap and dead easy way.
Give people an e-ink solution that can be distributed to everyone instantly and allow them to write notes on top and paper will start going away.
In an ideal world you could even have e-ink clients on a noteboard that get updates from a server so info can be passed to all employees without needing, for example, 10,000 iPad-like devices for people who don't really need them 99.99\% of the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560194</id>
	<title>Re:A couple of things</title>
	<author>dkf</author>
	<datestamp>1269166140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My desk's a lot bigger than the computer monitor</p></div><p>Spoken like a man who needs a bigger monitor. Go on! You know you want it!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My desk 's a lot bigger than the computer monitorSpoken like a man who needs a bigger monitor .
Go on !
You know you want it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My desk's a lot bigger than the computer monitorSpoken like a man who needs a bigger monitor.
Go on!
You know you want it!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561172</id>
	<title>Re:Surface computing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269172620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup.  Something like Microsoft Surface.</p><p>http://www.microsoft.com/surface/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup .
Something like Microsoft Surface.http : //www.microsoft.com/surface/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup.
Something like Microsoft Surface.http://www.microsoft.com/surface/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563170</id>
	<title>Re:Erasable paper</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1269188400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>There are currently some printers out there that handle special paper that can be erased. With a decade of R&amp;D more we could have affordable, erasable paper and pens and markers to go along with that paper.</i><br>The thing that strikes me is that in my experiance documents (particulally short unbound ones) that are used more than a trivial ammount tend to get rather dog-eared.</p><p>After a few rounds of being used, put though the eraser and put back through the printer will this paper really be in a good enough condition to go through automatic feeders without jamming them up?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are currently some printers out there that handle special paper that can be erased .
With a decade of R&amp;D more we could have affordable , erasable paper and pens and markers to go along with that paper.The thing that strikes me is that in my experiance documents ( particulally short unbound ones ) that are used more than a trivial ammount tend to get rather dog-eared.After a few rounds of being used , put though the eraser and put back through the printer will this paper really be in a good enough condition to go through automatic feeders without jamming them up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are currently some printers out there that handle special paper that can be erased.
With a decade of R&amp;D more we could have affordable, erasable paper and pens and markers to go along with that paper.The thing that strikes me is that in my experiance documents (particulally short unbound ones) that are used more than a trivial ammount tend to get rather dog-eared.After a few rounds of being used, put though the eraser and put back through the printer will this paper really be in a good enough condition to go through automatic feeders without jamming them up?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559556</id>
	<title>Re:Resistance Of Change</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1269205020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>99\% of the employees have 10-30 yellow stickys stuck all over their desk for the password change of the week.</p></div><p>Corrected that for you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>99 \ % of the employees have 10-30 yellow stickys stuck all over their desk for the password change of the week.Corrected that for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>99\% of the employees have 10-30 yellow stickys stuck all over their desk for the password change of the week.Corrected that for you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386</id>
	<title>My office is paperless for years</title>
	<author>tftp</author>
	<datestamp>1269204000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>I know there are other reasons why offices are not becoming paperless. What are your reasons?</i>
</p><p>
I don't use paper at my home office. I have a printer for rare occasions, like when I want to print a backup set of driving directions for a long trip (the primary set being the GPS.) Some say they don't trust Windows (or any other OS, I guess) with their data. That's what backups are for. When was the last time you did a backup of all your papers, by the way? Papers are easy to lose and nearly impossible to find when you need them.
</p><p>
I have a scanner next to me, if I have a paper (like a manual on something I bought) I scan it and save. The paper manual may then be recycled. Less stuff to lay around and produce dust.
</p><p>
Even when I worked at a larger company (last year) the office was mostly paperless. All communication was done through email and IM and phone. I wasn't involved with code reviews, but meetings were done without papers - using a projector connected to presenter's notebook. The only paper I handled there was time cards, and that was only because of certain accounting regulations (it must be a physical document with a signature.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know there are other reasons why offices are not becoming paperless .
What are your reasons ?
I do n't use paper at my home office .
I have a printer for rare occasions , like when I want to print a backup set of driving directions for a long trip ( the primary set being the GPS .
) Some say they do n't trust Windows ( or any other OS , I guess ) with their data .
That 's what backups are for .
When was the last time you did a backup of all your papers , by the way ?
Papers are easy to lose and nearly impossible to find when you need them .
I have a scanner next to me , if I have a paper ( like a manual on something I bought ) I scan it and save .
The paper manual may then be recycled .
Less stuff to lay around and produce dust .
Even when I worked at a larger company ( last year ) the office was mostly paperless .
All communication was done through email and IM and phone .
I was n't involved with code reviews , but meetings were done without papers - using a projector connected to presenter 's notebook .
The only paper I handled there was time cards , and that was only because of certain accounting regulations ( it must be a physical document with a signature .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I know there are other reasons why offices are not becoming paperless.
What are your reasons?
I don't use paper at my home office.
I have a printer for rare occasions, like when I want to print a backup set of driving directions for a long trip (the primary set being the GPS.
) Some say they don't trust Windows (or any other OS, I guess) with their data.
That's what backups are for.
When was the last time you did a backup of all your papers, by the way?
Papers are easy to lose and nearly impossible to find when you need them.
I have a scanner next to me, if I have a paper (like a manual on something I bought) I scan it and save.
The paper manual may then be recycled.
Less stuff to lay around and produce dust.
Even when I worked at a larger company (last year) the office was mostly paperless.
All communication was done through email and IM and phone.
I wasn't involved with code reviews, but meetings were done without papers - using a projector connected to presenter's notebook.
The only paper I handled there was time cards, and that was only because of certain accounting regulations (it must be a physical document with a signature.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560216</id>
	<title>Racial epithet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269166260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Umm<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... you may wish to be aware that "spear-chucker" is most commonly used (here in the midwestern U.S., at least) as a racial slur.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm ... you may wish to be aware that " spear-chucker " is most commonly used ( here in the midwestern U.S. , at least ) as a racial slur .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm ... you may wish to be aware that "spear-chucker" is most commonly used (here in the midwestern U.S., at least) as a racial slur.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560738</id>
	<title>Less Paper Office</title>
	<author>Dausha</author>
	<datestamp>1269169860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It depends on what your goal is. Who here remembers what it was like when you had paper memos, routing forms, etc.? We accomplish so much business via email now, and other network mechanisms. How much drafting (e.g. architectural) paper was lost 30 years ago verse today.</p><p>While we are not paper-free, we are paper-less.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It depends on what your goal is .
Who here remembers what it was like when you had paper memos , routing forms , etc. ?
We accomplish so much business via email now , and other network mechanisms .
How much drafting ( e.g .
architectural ) paper was lost 30 years ago verse today.While we are not paper-free , we are paper-less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It depends on what your goal is.
Who here remembers what it was like when you had paper memos, routing forms, etc.?
We accomplish so much business via email now, and other network mechanisms.
How much drafting (e.g.
architectural) paper was lost 30 years ago verse today.While we are not paper-free, we are paper-less.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565362</id>
	<title>Re:Drawing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269262440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Sometimes when working on some algorithmical or mathematical problem, I draw stuff on paper to visualize the problem better and find the solution. Drawing on a computer screen will never replace drawing with a pen on paper for that purpose for me.</i> </p><p>Certainly true. However, at times, I have found a reasonably sized (2 x 3 foot) whiteboard to be even more usable. It was simpler to make numerous incremental changes with a board eraser than it would have been on paper, especially as I used using many different colored pens. When done, a simple digital picture allowed me to include the finished drawing with the rest of the docs, just as a scanner would do in your case.</p><p>Other times I have found a digital camera to be a great tool:</p><p>Late one cold night, I used one under my truck to see what I would have to do to replace the starter. Then I looked the pix over in comfort inside the house.</p><p>I half an hour in the crawlspace under the house, I took lots of pictures of all the plumbing and a few measurements. It was then far easier to construct an accurate layout on paper than it would have been had I tried to draw while laying down in the crawlspace.</p><p>Really good when disassembling complex parts to make sure you put everything back in the correct order and orientation.</p><p>I once got a call from a friend asking me to go to her house to receive an unscheduled delivery of furniture and to get it taken into the house. I wasn't sure I had the right key and, if not, would have had to go by her work (far off in the opposite direction) to get the right one. I laid the keys I had out on a black cloth and snapped a picture, which I then emailed to her at work. The keys in the image, conveniently, came out just about actual size. She called me back and told me which key in the set was hers. Lots of time saved there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes when working on some algorithmical or mathematical problem , I draw stuff on paper to visualize the problem better and find the solution .
Drawing on a computer screen will never replace drawing with a pen on paper for that purpose for me .
Certainly true .
However , at times , I have found a reasonably sized ( 2 x 3 foot ) whiteboard to be even more usable .
It was simpler to make numerous incremental changes with a board eraser than it would have been on paper , especially as I used using many different colored pens .
When done , a simple digital picture allowed me to include the finished drawing with the rest of the docs , just as a scanner would do in your case.Other times I have found a digital camera to be a great tool : Late one cold night , I used one under my truck to see what I would have to do to replace the starter .
Then I looked the pix over in comfort inside the house.I half an hour in the crawlspace under the house , I took lots of pictures of all the plumbing and a few measurements .
It was then far easier to construct an accurate layout on paper than it would have been had I tried to draw while laying down in the crawlspace.Really good when disassembling complex parts to make sure you put everything back in the correct order and orientation.I once got a call from a friend asking me to go to her house to receive an unscheduled delivery of furniture and to get it taken into the house .
I was n't sure I had the right key and , if not , would have had to go by her work ( far off in the opposite direction ) to get the right one .
I laid the keys I had out on a black cloth and snapped a picture , which I then emailed to her at work .
The keys in the image , conveniently , came out just about actual size .
She called me back and told me which key in the set was hers .
Lots of time saved there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes when working on some algorithmical or mathematical problem, I draw stuff on paper to visualize the problem better and find the solution.
Drawing on a computer screen will never replace drawing with a pen on paper for that purpose for me.
Certainly true.
However, at times, I have found a reasonably sized (2 x 3 foot) whiteboard to be even more usable.
It was simpler to make numerous incremental changes with a board eraser than it would have been on paper, especially as I used using many different colored pens.
When done, a simple digital picture allowed me to include the finished drawing with the rest of the docs, just as a scanner would do in your case.Other times I have found a digital camera to be a great tool:Late one cold night, I used one under my truck to see what I would have to do to replace the starter.
Then I looked the pix over in comfort inside the house.I half an hour in the crawlspace under the house, I took lots of pictures of all the plumbing and a few measurements.
It was then far easier to construct an accurate layout on paper than it would have been had I tried to draw while laying down in the crawlspace.Really good when disassembling complex parts to make sure you put everything back in the correct order and orientation.I once got a call from a friend asking me to go to her house to receive an unscheduled delivery of furniture and to get it taken into the house.
I wasn't sure I had the right key and, if not, would have had to go by her work (far off in the opposite direction) to get the right one.
I laid the keys I had out on a black cloth and snapped a picture, which I then emailed to her at work.
The keys in the image, conveniently, came out just about actual size.
She called me back and told me which key in the set was hers.
Lots of time saved there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561262</id>
	<title>Re:Drawing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269173340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm still optimistic that somebody will create a convenient markup/programming language for diagrams.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm still optimistic that somebody will create a convenient markup/programming language for diagrams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm still optimistic that somebody will create a convenient markup/programming language for diagrams.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560192</id>
	<title>Re:A couple of things</title>
	<author>Belial6</author>
	<datestamp>1269166140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Current corporate culture also makes the change control problem worse.  As it now stands, many in management still think of computers as some magic box.  This leads them to the poor decision of allowing system administrators to make business decisions that are not system administration issues.  Things like allowing a system administrator decide who gets access to a document, or who can change it.  Where I work, the system administrator decided that they only need to keep backups of documents concerning employee injuries for 3 days.  There is no excuse for that kind of decision being left in a system administrators hands.  Legal should be making the decision on how long backups need to be kept for records that may be needed for future lawsuits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Current corporate culture also makes the change control problem worse .
As it now stands , many in management still think of computers as some magic box .
This leads them to the poor decision of allowing system administrators to make business decisions that are not system administration issues .
Things like allowing a system administrator decide who gets access to a document , or who can change it .
Where I work , the system administrator decided that they only need to keep backups of documents concerning employee injuries for 3 days .
There is no excuse for that kind of decision being left in a system administrators hands .
Legal should be making the decision on how long backups need to be kept for records that may be needed for future lawsuits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Current corporate culture also makes the change control problem worse.
As it now stands, many in management still think of computers as some magic box.
This leads them to the poor decision of allowing system administrators to make business decisions that are not system administration issues.
Things like allowing a system administrator decide who gets access to a document, or who can change it.
Where I work, the system administrator decided that they only need to keep backups of documents concerning employee injuries for 3 days.
There is no excuse for that kind of decision being left in a system administrators hands.
Legal should be making the decision on how long backups need to be kept for records that may be needed for future lawsuits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560300</id>
	<title>Something has changed</title>
	<author>DollyTheSheep</author>
	<datestamp>1269166860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used to print out HUGE amounts of paper for reference manuals, emails, technical documentation, meeting notes and  proceedings etc., etc. Not so anyymore. I do not exactly know why, but somehow I'm now totally content with reading things on the screen. Probably has to do with wider screens or better tools for annotation and sharing. Or  my job has somewhat changed and the  need of having several pages side by side has dimished. I honestly do not know.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to print out HUGE amounts of paper for reference manuals , emails , technical documentation , meeting notes and proceedings etc. , etc .
Not so anyymore .
I do not exactly know why , but somehow I 'm now totally content with reading things on the screen .
Probably has to do with wider screens or better tools for annotation and sharing .
Or my job has somewhat changed and the need of having several pages side by side has dimished .
I honestly do not know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to print out HUGE amounts of paper for reference manuals, emails, technical documentation, meeting notes and  proceedings etc., etc.
Not so anyymore.
I do not exactly know why, but somehow I'm now totally content with reading things on the screen.
Probably has to do with wider screens or better tools for annotation and sharing.
Or  my job has somewhat changed and the  need of having several pages side by side has dimished.
I honestly do not know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559462</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is humans.</p><p>Stupid humans that like forms.</p><p>Its really retarded, but I see a lot of people that like to write by hand and they have like multi-color pens and fill shit out. Wtf.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is humans.Stupid humans that like forms.Its really retarded , but I see a lot of people that like to write by hand and they have like multi-color pens and fill shit out .
Wtf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is humans.Stupid humans that like forms.Its really retarded, but I see a lot of people that like to write by hand and they have like multi-color pens and fill shit out.
Wtf.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559852</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>dvice\_null</author>
	<datestamp>1269163980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If a friend installed that "Windows" for you, you might want to see this:<br><a href="http://ubuntu.online02.com/node/14" title="online02.com">http://ubuntu.online02.com/node/14</a> [online02.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If a friend installed that " Windows " for you , you might want to see this : http : //ubuntu.online02.com/node/14 [ online02.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a friend installed that "Windows" for you, you might want to see this:http://ubuntu.online02.com/node/14 [online02.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559840</id>
	<title>Re:The paperless toilet.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269163920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You've got to have shit to hit the fan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've got to have shit to hit the fan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've got to have shit to hit the fan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561628</id>
	<title>um the printer makers?</title>
	<author>josepha48</author>
	<datestamp>1269176520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>no seriously.  there are people that like hard copies of everything to file. I don't but some do. Also there are some places that require paperwork, especially us government agencies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>no seriously .
there are people that like hard copies of everything to file .
I do n't but some do .
Also there are some places that require paperwork , especially us government agencies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no seriously.
there are people that like hard copies of everything to file.
I don't but some do.
Also there are some places that require paperwork, especially us government agencies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565326</id>
	<title>Re:A couple of things</title>
	<author>Foolicious</author>
	<datestamp>1269262140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Reliability. I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going <i>*poof*</i> when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.</p></div><p>Yeah - because in that case it is great to have a bunch of notes about something that doesn't matter because it can't be restored.  I jest, of course, I jest, so you don't need to respond and explain the systems and why I am wrong and you are right.  Just trying to inject a small morsel of something to think about and a large morsel of levity.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reliability .
I do n't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going * poof * when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT ca n't afford to do.Yeah - because in that case it is great to have a bunch of notes about something that does n't matter because it ca n't be restored .
I jest , of course , I jest , so you do n't need to respond and explain the systems and why I am wrong and you are right .
Just trying to inject a small morsel of something to think about and a large morsel of levity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reliability.
I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going *poof* when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.Yeah - because in that case it is great to have a bunch of notes about something that doesn't matter because it can't be restored.
I jest, of course, I jest, so you don't need to respond and explain the systems and why I am wrong and you are right.
Just trying to inject a small morsel of something to think about and a large morsel of levity.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559666</id>
	<title>Easy answer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269162660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The suits. AKA the useless eaters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The suits .
AKA the useless eaters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The suits.
AKA the useless eaters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563820</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269194460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This, folks, is why the paperless office isn't here: complete ignorance of technology, and on a nerd site, to boot.</p><p>Dude! Wake up. You don't have to pass stuff around. You can both connect to the same file on a server and edit it simultaneously. One of your phones / tablets / computers can even act as the server so that you don't need a standalone one. Look at Abiword's collaboration features. Look at Google Docs'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This , folks , is why the paperless office is n't here : complete ignorance of technology , and on a nerd site , to boot.Dude !
Wake up .
You do n't have to pass stuff around .
You can both connect to the same file on a server and edit it simultaneously .
One of your phones / tablets / computers can even act as the server so that you do n't need a standalone one .
Look at Abiword 's collaboration features .
Look at Google Docs' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This, folks, is why the paperless office isn't here: complete ignorance of technology, and on a nerd site, to boot.Dude!
Wake up.
You don't have to pass stuff around.
You can both connect to the same file on a server and edit it simultaneously.
One of your phones / tablets / computers can even act as the server so that you don't need a standalone one.
Look at Abiword's collaboration features.
Look at Google Docs'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564456</id>
	<title>Huh? What decade are these guys living in?</title>
	<author>Herby Sagues</author>
	<datestamp>1269290760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My office (part of a large corporation) has been paperless for probably five years now. And it wasn't even a conscious decision: paper simply does not scale. I haven't used paper for anything other than reading a long document while on a plane for years. And I don't see almost any paper in any office around mine.
The paperless office has been a reality for some time for many. Those that have not gotten there yet are living in the past.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My office ( part of a large corporation ) has been paperless for probably five years now .
And it was n't even a conscious decision : paper simply does not scale .
I have n't used paper for anything other than reading a long document while on a plane for years .
And I do n't see almost any paper in any office around mine .
The paperless office has been a reality for some time for many .
Those that have not gotten there yet are living in the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My office (part of a large corporation) has been paperless for probably five years now.
And it wasn't even a conscious decision: paper simply does not scale.
I haven't used paper for anything other than reading a long document while on a plane for years.
And I don't see almost any paper in any office around mine.
The paperless office has been a reality for some time for many.
Those that have not gotten there yet are living in the past.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559798</id>
	<title>Paperless office requirements</title>
	<author>beowulf01</author>
	<datestamp>1269163560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lets not dance around the fundamental issue. The Utopian ideal of a paperless office will never materialize until we can agree on a universal data standard.  With paper, we can still read the records of the Roman Empire, Ancient China and Ancient Egypt.  Even if today's modern languages fall to extinction a thousand years from now, we can still recover the paper based history.  Any electronic records would be lost.  I have 8 inch and 5 1/4 floppy discs from a CP/M Z80 S100 system I used back in the early eighties that are now essentially unreadable (fortunately I have paper print outs!).  Unless we have a universal standard, and get one soon, the "computer revolution" era will be a black hole to future generations.

On the other hand, maybe we don't want future generations to study the conversation on slashdot.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets not dance around the fundamental issue .
The Utopian ideal of a paperless office will never materialize until we can agree on a universal data standard .
With paper , we can still read the records of the Roman Empire , Ancient China and Ancient Egypt .
Even if today 's modern languages fall to extinction a thousand years from now , we can still recover the paper based history .
Any electronic records would be lost .
I have 8 inch and 5 1/4 floppy discs from a CP/M Z80 S100 system I used back in the early eighties that are now essentially unreadable ( fortunately I have paper print outs ! ) .
Unless we have a universal standard , and get one soon , the " computer revolution " era will be a black hole to future generations .
On the other hand , maybe we do n't want future generations to study the conversation on slashdot.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets not dance around the fundamental issue.
The Utopian ideal of a paperless office will never materialize until we can agree on a universal data standard.
With paper, we can still read the records of the Roman Empire, Ancient China and Ancient Egypt.
Even if today's modern languages fall to extinction a thousand years from now, we can still recover the paper based history.
Any electronic records would be lost.
I have 8 inch and 5 1/4 floppy discs from a CP/M Z80 S100 system I used back in the early eighties that are now essentially unreadable (fortunately I have paper print outs!).
Unless we have a universal standard, and get one soon, the "computer revolution" era will be a black hole to future generations.
On the other hand, maybe we don't want future generations to study the conversation on slashdot.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565428</id>
	<title>What is hold US back?</title>
	<author>Slash.Poop</author>
	<datestamp>1269263700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just a brief story on what is holding my company (insurance) back.<br> <br>

A few years back we looked into "paperless". What we found out, yes of course the IT department could do it. We would need terabytes worth of space but it could be done fairly easily. However, after having our legal department look at the same issue we found that NO we can not do it. The law was worded to state that we NEED to have a paper file on site. In some cases we needed to keep the file for 20 years.<br> <br>

So, from a IT perspective NOTHING was keeping us from going paperless. However, from a red tape perspective we could not go paperless. At least that is how it is in my industry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a brief story on what is holding my company ( insurance ) back .
A few years back we looked into " paperless " .
What we found out , yes of course the IT department could do it .
We would need terabytes worth of space but it could be done fairly easily .
However , after having our legal department look at the same issue we found that NO we can not do it .
The law was worded to state that we NEED to have a paper file on site .
In some cases we needed to keep the file for 20 years .
So , from a IT perspective NOTHING was keeping us from going paperless .
However , from a red tape perspective we could not go paperless .
At least that is how it is in my industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a brief story on what is holding my company (insurance) back.
A few years back we looked into "paperless".
What we found out, yes of course the IT department could do it.
We would need terabytes worth of space but it could be done fairly easily.
However, after having our legal department look at the same issue we found that NO we can not do it.
The law was worded to state that we NEED to have a paper file on site.
In some cases we needed to keep the file for 20 years.
So, from a IT perspective NOTHING was keeping us from going paperless.
However, from a red tape perspective we could not go paperless.
At least that is how it is in my industry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560502</id>
	<title>Re:A couple of things</title>
	<author>freedomlinux</author>
	<datestamp>1269168240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[...] there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change. The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that <i>was</i> what was originally specified.</p></div><p>
This is an issue, but it can be mostly resolved with versioning filesystems like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Files-11" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Files-11</a> [wikipedia.org] or maybe even ZFS snapshots. I can't even tell you the number of times I've made changes to a document then wish afterwards I still had the original version...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ ... ] there 's no record anymore of what the document said before the change .
The paper copies in my drawer ca n't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified .
This is an issue , but it can be mostly resolved with versioning filesystems like Files-11 [ wikipedia.org ] or maybe even ZFS snapshots .
I ca n't even tell you the number of times I 've made changes to a document then wish afterwards I still had the original version.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[...] there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change.
The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified.
This is an issue, but it can be mostly resolved with versioning filesystems like Files-11 [wikipedia.org] or maybe even ZFS snapshots.
I can't even tell you the number of times I've made changes to a document then wish afterwards I still had the original version...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31567348</id>
	<title>I can tell you right now....</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1269270120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the cost of sounding too sci-fi, i can tell you right now the only time we will truly be able to go paperless, much or less...<br>We need to develop a small portable machine that chews up paper from one end, and shreds it, pulps it, then repapers it on the other side, that way all the recycling needed is to buy the machine and mast involved, then what ever paper is needed can be found anywhere, no more paper costs, because we already have all the paper we need....we just rechew it each time over.</p><p>Problem is, the cost of such a machine, and even once mass produced to bring the price down, it would have to remain up to th companies to enforce their policies of using such machines and recycling their own paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the cost of sounding too sci-fi , i can tell you right now the only time we will truly be able to go paperless , much or less...We need to develop a small portable machine that chews up paper from one end , and shreds it , pulps it , then repapers it on the other side , that way all the recycling needed is to buy the machine and mast involved , then what ever paper is needed can be found anywhere , no more paper costs , because we already have all the paper we need....we just rechew it each time over.Problem is , the cost of such a machine , and even once mass produced to bring the price down , it would have to remain up to th companies to enforce their policies of using such machines and recycling their own paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the cost of sounding too sci-fi, i can tell you right now the only time we will truly be able to go paperless, much or less...We need to develop a small portable machine that chews up paper from one end, and shreds it, pulps it, then repapers it on the other side, that way all the recycling needed is to buy the machine and mast involved, then what ever paper is needed can be found anywhere, no more paper costs, because we already have all the paper we need....we just rechew it each time over.Problem is, the cost of such a machine, and even once mass produced to bring the price down, it would have to remain up to th companies to enforce their policies of using such machines and recycling their own paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559664</id>
	<title>"Quality" Procedures = More Paper</title>
	<author>pandymen</author>
	<datestamp>1269162660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Quality procedures force those in my office to keep a record of their hand markups.  We need to be able to document all of the checks that took place to get a document out the door...hand marked, initialed, and dated.

Then, when we kick something up for approval to go out the door, I need to print out fresh copy.  Project managers also like their own hard copies to look at.

Basically, although I may not have a problem looking at documents on my computer, those responsible for the overall project do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quality procedures force those in my office to keep a record of their hand markups .
We need to be able to document all of the checks that took place to get a document out the door...hand marked , initialed , and dated .
Then , when we kick something up for approval to go out the door , I need to print out fresh copy .
Project managers also like their own hard copies to look at .
Basically , although I may not have a problem looking at documents on my computer , those responsible for the overall project do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quality procedures force those in my office to keep a record of their hand markups.
We need to be able to document all of the checks that took place to get a document out the door...hand marked, initialed, and dated.
Then, when we kick something up for approval to go out the door, I need to print out fresh copy.
Project managers also like their own hard copies to look at.
Basically, although I may not have a problem looking at documents on my computer, those responsible for the overall project do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31580092</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269286740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>... but if it is more easily done on paper, it makes no business sense to do it on a computer. </i> </p><p>Old story:</p><p>Lord Kelvin invented a tide-recording gauge. Kinda like a seismograph -- the waves moved a pencil holder which made lines around a rotating drum. When he presented it to the royal academy, he was criticized for not using the recently-developed fountain pen instead of an old-fashioned pencil.</p><p>He answered, "There is adequate power in the sea to drive a pencil."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... but if it is more easily done on paper , it makes no business sense to do it on a computer .
Old story : Lord Kelvin invented a tide-recording gauge .
Kinda like a seismograph -- the waves moved a pencil holder which made lines around a rotating drum .
When he presented it to the royal academy , he was criticized for not using the recently-developed fountain pen instead of an old-fashioned pencil.He answered , " There is adequate power in the sea to drive a pencil .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... but if it is more easily done on paper, it makes no business sense to do it on a computer.
Old story:Lord Kelvin invented a tide-recording gauge.
Kinda like a seismograph -- the waves moved a pencil holder which made lines around a rotating drum.
When he presented it to the royal academy, he was criticized for not using the recently-developed fountain pen instead of an old-fashioned pencil.He answered, "There is adequate power in the sea to drive a pencil.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31570018</id>
	<title>Paper and digital perform different functions...</title>
	<author>PensivePeter</author>
	<datestamp>1269277320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was recently asked for a copy of a paper (sic!) that I wrote and presented seven years ago for the European Parliament on this problem, and have decided to make it more freely available: you can download "In Praise of paper" at <a href="http://www.pensive.eu/file/65.ppsx" title="pensive.eu" rel="nofollow">http://www.pensive.eu/file/65.ppsx</a> [pensive.eu]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was recently asked for a copy of a paper ( sic !
) that I wrote and presented seven years ago for the European Parliament on this problem , and have decided to make it more freely available : you can download " In Praise of paper " at http : //www.pensive.eu/file/65.ppsx [ pensive.eu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was recently asked for a copy of a paper (sic!
) that I wrote and presented seven years ago for the European Parliament on this problem, and have decided to make it more freely available: you can download "In Praise of paper" at http://www.pensive.eu/file/65.ppsx [pensive.eu]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563154</id>
	<title>Waste</title>
	<author>phreakincool</author>
	<datestamp>1269188280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've seen people literally print-out 300 page (single-sided) manuals and PDFs, which will probably only be read by them, once.  I think they do it to appear to be "busy".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen people literally print-out 300 page ( single-sided ) manuals and PDFs , which will probably only be read by them , once .
I think they do it to appear to be " busy " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen people literally print-out 300 page (single-sided) manuals and PDFs, which will probably only be read by them, once.
I think they do it to appear to be "busy".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559650</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>phx\_zs</author>
	<datestamp>1269162600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.rightsignature.com/" title="rightsignature.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.rightsignature.com/</a> [rightsignature.com] is a great app for this for a small monthly fee</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.rightsignature.com/ [ rightsignature.com ] is a great app for this for a small monthly fee</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.rightsignature.com/ [rightsignature.com] is a great app for this for a small monthly fee</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560076</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269165360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other words:<br>"We'll achieve the paperless office about the same time as we figure out the 3 sea shells."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words : " We 'll achieve the paperless office about the same time as we figure out the 3 sea shells .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other words:"We'll achieve the paperless office about the same time as we figure out the 3 sea shells.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560330</id>
	<title>Proprietary (closed) and Incompatible Technology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269167040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Kindle, iPad, Reader, Nook and OLPC all offer closed, to varying degrees, incompatability<br>readers. And, some require you to use THEIR servers to load YOUR own documents to<br>your OWN device. Companies need to be able to have control over what documents are<br>available in what formats and to what devices they choose. Personally, I am not going<br>to buy a device unless I have control over how I use it. The first company to offer a<br>cheap ($100 - $200) and open document view/reader will change the status quo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kindle , iPad , Reader , Nook and OLPC all offer closed , to varying degrees , incompatabilityreaders .
And , some require you to use THEIR servers to load YOUR own documents toyour OWN device .
Companies need to be able to have control over what documents areavailable in what formats and to what devices they choose .
Personally , I am not goingto buy a device unless I have control over how I use it .
The first company to offer acheap ( $ 100 - $ 200 ) and open document view/reader will change the status quo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kindle, iPad, Reader, Nook and OLPC all offer closed, to varying degrees, incompatabilityreaders.
And, some require you to use THEIR servers to load YOUR own documents toyour OWN device.
Companies need to be able to have control over what documents areavailable in what formats and to what devices they choose.
Personally, I am not goingto buy a device unless I have control over how I use it.
The first company to offer acheap ($100 - $200) and open document view/reader will change the status quo.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560152</id>
	<title>People printing things out?</title>
	<author>pthisis</author>
	<datestamp>1269165960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It may be obvious, but there isn't really a technical barrier here on the navigation capability (as opposed to the UI and possibly implementation in some programs).  In most decent document reading programs, it's trivial to set lots bookmarks and flip back and forth between pages much more easily than you can with paper.</p><p>On top of that, there's often fast domain-specific navigation (e.g. jumping from chapter to chapter, drilling through function calls in code, grabbing references, skipping to and from the index), searching, and all kinds of other great reading aids.</p><p>And yet I still find people printing out documents that we're reviewing coming by and saying "here, I printed out a copy for everyone" and dropping a copy "helpfully" on my desk--which I hate, because I'm never going to look at it and that paper is wasted (sure, it's still got the back for scratch paper, but it's still somewhat wasted).</p><p>This leads me to think there are a few major problems:<br>1. Program user interfaces aren't exposing bookmark functionality enough--this is a major time saver, and one of the prime reasons I hear people saying they print stuff out is so they can flip between 2 or 3 things quickly when that should absolutely be a reason to prefer reading online.<br>2. People aren't learning their tools effectively; for those who are often using a particular document reader as part of the job, it's worth putting a little effort into learning how it can help you.<br>3. As the OP notes, markup can be restrictive--this is especially true for domain-specific markup (e.g. the common editor's symbols like squiggly underlines, paragraph begin/move, arrows running from here to there, etc).  This is partially because those markups were designed for a different medium, and partially because many apps don't make a strong effort to support flexible markup<br>4. People don't like computer monitors for some reason.  I think this is sometimes true, but often overstated--a lot of people make this claim when the real problem lies elsewhere.  For those who really have trouble with modern screens, it's a tough problem though perhaps OLEDs, e-ink style displays, or some other advance will eventually offer a solution</p><p>But I think an equally large problem is simple habit.  People are used to flipping through paper, to the point that they even assume other people feel the same way and "helpfully" print everything out even for those who would much rather have it online.  And it happens in all kinds of domains: Post-it notes get stuck to my monitor when an email would've been easier for both of us, faxes of photos get sent instead of just attaching the image or sending a link to it, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It may be obvious , but there is n't really a technical barrier here on the navigation capability ( as opposed to the UI and possibly implementation in some programs ) .
In most decent document reading programs , it 's trivial to set lots bookmarks and flip back and forth between pages much more easily than you can with paper.On top of that , there 's often fast domain-specific navigation ( e.g .
jumping from chapter to chapter , drilling through function calls in code , grabbing references , skipping to and from the index ) , searching , and all kinds of other great reading aids.And yet I still find people printing out documents that we 're reviewing coming by and saying " here , I printed out a copy for everyone " and dropping a copy " helpfully " on my desk--which I hate , because I 'm never going to look at it and that paper is wasted ( sure , it 's still got the back for scratch paper , but it 's still somewhat wasted ) .This leads me to think there are a few major problems : 1 .
Program user interfaces are n't exposing bookmark functionality enough--this is a major time saver , and one of the prime reasons I hear people saying they print stuff out is so they can flip between 2 or 3 things quickly when that should absolutely be a reason to prefer reading online.2 .
People are n't learning their tools effectively ; for those who are often using a particular document reader as part of the job , it 's worth putting a little effort into learning how it can help you.3 .
As the OP notes , markup can be restrictive--this is especially true for domain-specific markup ( e.g .
the common editor 's symbols like squiggly underlines , paragraph begin/move , arrows running from here to there , etc ) .
This is partially because those markups were designed for a different medium , and partially because many apps do n't make a strong effort to support flexible markup4 .
People do n't like computer monitors for some reason .
I think this is sometimes true , but often overstated--a lot of people make this claim when the real problem lies elsewhere .
For those who really have trouble with modern screens , it 's a tough problem though perhaps OLEDs , e-ink style displays , or some other advance will eventually offer a solutionBut I think an equally large problem is simple habit .
People are used to flipping through paper , to the point that they even assume other people feel the same way and " helpfully " print everything out even for those who would much rather have it online .
And it happens in all kinds of domains : Post-it notes get stuck to my monitor when an email would 've been easier for both of us , faxes of photos get sent instead of just attaching the image or sending a link to it , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It may be obvious, but there isn't really a technical barrier here on the navigation capability (as opposed to the UI and possibly implementation in some programs).
In most decent document reading programs, it's trivial to set lots bookmarks and flip back and forth between pages much more easily than you can with paper.On top of that, there's often fast domain-specific navigation (e.g.
jumping from chapter to chapter, drilling through function calls in code, grabbing references, skipping to and from the index), searching, and all kinds of other great reading aids.And yet I still find people printing out documents that we're reviewing coming by and saying "here, I printed out a copy for everyone" and dropping a copy "helpfully" on my desk--which I hate, because I'm never going to look at it and that paper is wasted (sure, it's still got the back for scratch paper, but it's still somewhat wasted).This leads me to think there are a few major problems:1.
Program user interfaces aren't exposing bookmark functionality enough--this is a major time saver, and one of the prime reasons I hear people saying they print stuff out is so they can flip between 2 or 3 things quickly when that should absolutely be a reason to prefer reading online.2.
People aren't learning their tools effectively; for those who are often using a particular document reader as part of the job, it's worth putting a little effort into learning how it can help you.3.
As the OP notes, markup can be restrictive--this is especially true for domain-specific markup (e.g.
the common editor's symbols like squiggly underlines, paragraph begin/move, arrows running from here to there, etc).
This is partially because those markups were designed for a different medium, and partially because many apps don't make a strong effort to support flexible markup4.
People don't like computer monitors for some reason.
I think this is sometimes true, but often overstated--a lot of people make this claim when the real problem lies elsewhere.
For those who really have trouble with modern screens, it's a tough problem though perhaps OLEDs, e-ink style displays, or some other advance will eventually offer a solutionBut I think an equally large problem is simple habit.
People are used to flipping through paper, to the point that they even assume other people feel the same way and "helpfully" print everything out even for those who would much rather have it online.
And it happens in all kinds of domains: Post-it notes get stuck to my monitor when an email would've been easier for both of us, faxes of photos get sent instead of just attaching the image or sending a link to it, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559674</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Nuskrad</author>
	<datestamp>1269162720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can always use the three seashells instead</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can always use the three seashells instead</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can always use the three seashells instead</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559528</id>
	<title>Late Adopters</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is holding back the paperless office?  Late adopters e.g. people who still want to see paper copies of things.  This often corresponds to age, but lets not go there...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is holding back the paperless office ?
Late adopters e.g .
people who still want to see paper copies of things .
This often corresponds to age , but lets not go there.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is holding back the paperless office?
Late adopters e.g.
people who still want to see paper copies of things.
This often corresponds to age, but lets not go there...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564464</id>
	<title>how can we get a paperless office if</title>
	<author>jobst</author>
	<datestamp>1269290940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how can we get a paperless office if even on slashdot people want to print<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how can we get a paperless office if even on slashdot people want to print ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how can we get a paperless office if even on slashdot people want to print ;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</id>
	<title>A: The law.</title>
	<author>hal2814</author>
	<datestamp>1269203580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you work in health care, at a law office, in insurance, in a financial institution or virtually anything else heavily regulated by the government, you must keep paper copies of most of your stuff.  You just can't have a paperless office in those situations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you work in health care , at a law office , in insurance , in a financial institution or virtually anything else heavily regulated by the government , you must keep paper copies of most of your stuff .
You just ca n't have a paperless office in those situations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you work in health care, at a law office, in insurance, in a financial institution or virtually anything else heavily regulated by the government, you must keep paper copies of most of your stuff.
You just can't have a paperless office in those situations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559492</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>www.echosign.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>www.echosign.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>www.echosign.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560766</id>
	<title>A good electronic equivalent</title>
	<author>Watertowers</author>
	<datestamp>1269170040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nothing beats a piece of paper for taking notes or drawing a quick diagram.

Laptops take too long to boot
Desktops are not portable
PDAs are too small
Whiteboards are too bulky to carry around
Digital screens are mostly (ecluding e-ink type screens) not readable in direct sunlight.
Software generally takes longer to perform the same task on paper.

Using paper, it is instant on, can be read in direct sunlight, comes in various sizes and is light and easy to carry, and with everyone thinking about the environment it is "greener" than all the alternatives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing beats a piece of paper for taking notes or drawing a quick diagram .
Laptops take too long to boot Desktops are not portable PDAs are too small Whiteboards are too bulky to carry around Digital screens are mostly ( ecluding e-ink type screens ) not readable in direct sunlight .
Software generally takes longer to perform the same task on paper .
Using paper , it is instant on , can be read in direct sunlight , comes in various sizes and is light and easy to carry , and with everyone thinking about the environment it is " greener " than all the alternatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing beats a piece of paper for taking notes or drawing a quick diagram.
Laptops take too long to boot
Desktops are not portable
PDAs are too small
Whiteboards are too bulky to carry around
Digital screens are mostly (ecluding e-ink type screens) not readable in direct sunlight.
Software generally takes longer to perform the same task on paper.
Using paper, it is instant on, can be read in direct sunlight, comes in various sizes and is light and easy to carry, and with everyone thinking about the environment it is "greener" than all the alternatives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560354</id>
	<title>Two Good Reasons</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269167160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) A crisp blank sheet of paper is the greatest design tool ever invented.</p><p>2) Most computer applications don't support the many-to-many relationships with the same ease physical mediums do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) A crisp blank sheet of paper is the greatest design tool ever invented.2 ) Most computer applications do n't support the many-to-many relationships with the same ease physical mediums do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) A crisp blank sheet of paper is the greatest design tool ever invented.2) Most computer applications don't support the many-to-many relationships with the same ease physical mediums do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561566</id>
	<title>I did some work a couple of years ago ...</title>
	<author>tehsota</author>
	<datestamp>1269176160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... designing a scanned document system customized for invoice storage. it works perfectly and is exactly what the customer wanted but it exposed a major issue with any kind of scanned document management system... organizing some kind of lookup system for the files that actually allows you to locate the document you want quickly and easily.  in my case I get a data feed from the invoicing software to correlate with scans that are automatically named with the invoice number. there in lies the reason it works so well... the data for lookup is already keyed in during the normal generation of invoices.  no additional man-hours are needed to key in scanned document specific information for later lookup and retreival.  yes we have to manually feed the actual invoices into a document scanner (so we can capture signatures that were added post-invoice printing) but the number of man-hours it takes for that is orders of magnitude less than it took to manually sort and file each day's invoices... not to mention later retrieval.  we're talking thousands of invoices a day also.

the other place I've had success with going mostly paper-less has been in certain law firms where they receive their "faxes" as PDFs (through an eFaxing service)  as well as scan in large case documents.  the reason it works for them is they're scanning at most 1 to 2 large-sized documents for archival storage a day so the manual task of naming and filing those scans isn't a huge task.

in the end being totally paperless is a nearly impossible task right now, but you can do things to lower your tree-killing count.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>... designing a scanned document system customized for invoice storage .
it works perfectly and is exactly what the customer wanted but it exposed a major issue with any kind of scanned document management system... organizing some kind of lookup system for the files that actually allows you to locate the document you want quickly and easily .
in my case I get a data feed from the invoicing software to correlate with scans that are automatically named with the invoice number .
there in lies the reason it works so well... the data for lookup is already keyed in during the normal generation of invoices .
no additional man-hours are needed to key in scanned document specific information for later lookup and retreival .
yes we have to manually feed the actual invoices into a document scanner ( so we can capture signatures that were added post-invoice printing ) but the number of man-hours it takes for that is orders of magnitude less than it took to manually sort and file each day 's invoices... not to mention later retrieval .
we 're talking thousands of invoices a day also .
the other place I 've had success with going mostly paper-less has been in certain law firms where they receive their " faxes " as PDFs ( through an eFaxing service ) as well as scan in large case documents .
the reason it works for them is they 're scanning at most 1 to 2 large-sized documents for archival storage a day so the manual task of naming and filing those scans is n't a huge task .
in the end being totally paperless is a nearly impossible task right now , but you can do things to lower your tree-killing count .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... designing a scanned document system customized for invoice storage.
it works perfectly and is exactly what the customer wanted but it exposed a major issue with any kind of scanned document management system... organizing some kind of lookup system for the files that actually allows you to locate the document you want quickly and easily.
in my case I get a data feed from the invoicing software to correlate with scans that are automatically named with the invoice number.
there in lies the reason it works so well... the data for lookup is already keyed in during the normal generation of invoices.
no additional man-hours are needed to key in scanned document specific information for later lookup and retreival.
yes we have to manually feed the actual invoices into a document scanner (so we can capture signatures that were added post-invoice printing) but the number of man-hours it takes for that is orders of magnitude less than it took to manually sort and file each day's invoices... not to mention later retrieval.
we're talking thousands of invoices a day also.
the other place I've had success with going mostly paper-less has been in certain law firms where they receive their "faxes" as PDFs (through an eFaxing service)  as well as scan in large case documents.
the reason it works for them is they're scanning at most 1 to 2 large-sized documents for archival storage a day so the manual task of naming and filing those scans isn't a huge task.
in the end being totally paperless is a nearly impossible task right now, but you can do things to lower your tree-killing count.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564632</id>
	<title>Re:A couple of things</title>
	<author>raylu</author>
	<datestamp>1269250860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Off-line use. I can refer to paper copies and make notes on them even when I'm not around the computer.</p></div><p>I don't think this is a fair argument for either side. Paperless people spend more time on the computer; people with lots of paper spend more time away from it.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Change control. Many times documents can be changed in the computer and, while it records that there was a change, there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change. The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that <i>was</i> what was originally specified.</p></div><p>That's exactly what version control is for. VCS's are better, though, because it's easier to create old versions and it may be harder to forge an old version.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Reliability. I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going <i>*poof*</i> when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.</p></div><p>Backing up digital data is far easier than paper. On the other hand, spilling coffee on a stack of papers is generally irrecoverable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Off-line use .
I can refer to paper copies and make notes on them even when I 'm not around the computer.I do n't think this is a fair argument for either side .
Paperless people spend more time on the computer ; people with lots of paper spend more time away from it.Change control .
Many times documents can be changed in the computer and , while it records that there was a change , there 's no record anymore of what the document said before the change .
The paper copies in my drawer ca n't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified.That 's exactly what version control is for .
VCS 's are better , though , because it 's easier to create old versions and it may be harder to forge an old version.Reliability .
I do n't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going * poof * when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT ca n't afford to do.Backing up digital data is far easier than paper .
On the other hand , spilling coffee on a stack of papers is generally irrecoverable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Off-line use.
I can refer to paper copies and make notes on them even when I'm not around the computer.I don't think this is a fair argument for either side.
Paperless people spend more time on the computer; people with lots of paper spend more time away from it.Change control.
Many times documents can be changed in the computer and, while it records that there was a change, there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change.
The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified.That's exactly what version control is for.
VCS's are better, though, because it's easier to create old versions and it may be harder to forge an old version.Reliability.
I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going *poof* when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.Backing up digital data is far easier than paper.
On the other hand, spilling coffee on a stack of papers is generally irrecoverable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562956</id>
	<title>No laptops allowed in meetings</title>
	<author>lanner</author>
	<datestamp>1269186600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fact that my manager throws a fit if I bring my laptop to meetings to take notes, because "he thinks it's rude".  I guess he must think I'm surfing porn rather than looking up information about the subject being discussed, or taking action item notes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that my manager throws a fit if I bring my laptop to meetings to take notes , because " he thinks it 's rude " .
I guess he must think I 'm surfing porn rather than looking up information about the subject being discussed , or taking action item notes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that my manager throws a fit if I bring my laptop to meetings to take notes, because "he thinks it's rude".
I guess he must think I'm surfing porn rather than looking up information about the subject being discussed, or taking action item notes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564738</id>
	<title>Re:Workflow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269252900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well i worked in place where they had CAD guys so that the impossible things to do cad got done in hour.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well i worked in place where they had CAD guys so that the impossible things to do cad got done in hour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well i worked in place where they had CAD guys so that the impossible things to do cad got done in hour.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560670</id>
	<title>Re:Prices &amp; UI...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269169380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In short, once someone sells a 7" display, with decent pen-input, basic wireless, and a stupid-simple UI, for perhaps $25, then you'll see the last stronghold of paper fall away.</p></div><p>Agreed. I would go as far as saying that Star Trek already predicted this: instead of paper, the Star Trek characters just pass around <a href="http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Padd" title="memory-alpha.org" rel="nofollow">Padds</a> [memory-alpha.org].</p><p>Really, all the device needs is an easy way to display PDFs on it (ex. perhaps something as simple as dragging a PDF to the bottom of your screen displays it on the nearest Padd-equivalent) and paper-simple pen input for writing on documents, and paper just won't have any advantages left in 90\%+ of situations.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In short , once someone sells a 7 " display , with decent pen-input , basic wireless , and a stupid-simple UI , for perhaps $ 25 , then you 'll see the last stronghold of paper fall away.Agreed .
I would go as far as saying that Star Trek already predicted this : instead of paper , the Star Trek characters just pass around Padds [ memory-alpha.org ] .Really , all the device needs is an easy way to display PDFs on it ( ex .
perhaps something as simple as dragging a PDF to the bottom of your screen displays it on the nearest Padd-equivalent ) and paper-simple pen input for writing on documents , and paper just wo n't have any advantages left in 90 \ % + of situations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In short, once someone sells a 7" display, with decent pen-input, basic wireless, and a stupid-simple UI, for perhaps $25, then you'll see the last stronghold of paper fall away.Agreed.
I would go as far as saying that Star Trek already predicted this: instead of paper, the Star Trek characters just pass around Padds [memory-alpha.org].Really, all the device needs is an easy way to display PDFs on it (ex.
perhaps something as simple as dragging a PDF to the bottom of your screen displays it on the nearest Padd-equivalent) and paper-simple pen input for writing on documents, and paper just won't have any advantages left in 90\%+ of situations.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559446</id>
	<title>You!</title>
	<author>owlstead</author>
	<datestamp>1269204360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's holding down the paperless Office? The answer is mainly: you. I've been working at my IT job for a few years. Almost if not all of my communication is by mail, phone or coffee machine. I normally do not read anything offline, and if I write anything down it's because I do the exercise to remember. Only top priority notes are kept, and they are directly typed into a document on the server.</p><p>I've recently had to host a meeting with 20 persons and I just used a laptop and a projector, The persons hosting the meeting before gave everybody a lot of paper (which 90 percent won't even read because they are not directly involved). I just gave them one double sided page so they could scribble some notes next to the items on the agenda.</p><p>I absolutely hate paper when I'm at work. Office documents need versions, need to be able to be pushed around, deleted and changed. You must be able to search through them quickly. Novels are much better in a book, but at work, I'll would prefer digital versions every time (even though paper even there certainly has its advantages).</p><p>Of course I do have double screens at work, something every IT person should have - if only to minimize costs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's holding down the paperless Office ?
The answer is mainly : you .
I 've been working at my IT job for a few years .
Almost if not all of my communication is by mail , phone or coffee machine .
I normally do not read anything offline , and if I write anything down it 's because I do the exercise to remember .
Only top priority notes are kept , and they are directly typed into a document on the server.I 've recently had to host a meeting with 20 persons and I just used a laptop and a projector , The persons hosting the meeting before gave everybody a lot of paper ( which 90 percent wo n't even read because they are not directly involved ) .
I just gave them one double sided page so they could scribble some notes next to the items on the agenda.I absolutely hate paper when I 'm at work .
Office documents need versions , need to be able to be pushed around , deleted and changed .
You must be able to search through them quickly .
Novels are much better in a book , but at work , I 'll would prefer digital versions every time ( even though paper even there certainly has its advantages ) .Of course I do have double screens at work , something every IT person should have - if only to minimize costs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's holding down the paperless Office?
The answer is mainly: you.
I've been working at my IT job for a few years.
Almost if not all of my communication is by mail, phone or coffee machine.
I normally do not read anything offline, and if I write anything down it's because I do the exercise to remember.
Only top priority notes are kept, and they are directly typed into a document on the server.I've recently had to host a meeting with 20 persons and I just used a laptop and a projector, The persons hosting the meeting before gave everybody a lot of paper (which 90 percent won't even read because they are not directly involved).
I just gave them one double sided page so they could scribble some notes next to the items on the agenda.I absolutely hate paper when I'm at work.
Office documents need versions, need to be able to be pushed around, deleted and changed.
You must be able to search through them quickly.
Novels are much better in a book, but at work, I'll would prefer digital versions every time (even though paper even there certainly has its advantages).Of course I do have double screens at work, something every IT person should have - if only to minimize costs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31568436</id>
	<title>Old people</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1269272940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only impediment is people who hand me printouts instead of sending me the original file.  After they send me the file, I recycle the paper.  Having worked from home for years, I can assure you that paperless is a no-brainer.  The only mail I got from the company was e-mail.</p><p>I take that back though... I do use paper for handwritten notes some times.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only impediment is people who hand me printouts instead of sending me the original file .
After they send me the file , I recycle the paper .
Having worked from home for years , I can assure you that paperless is a no-brainer .
The only mail I got from the company was e-mail.I take that back though... I do use paper for handwritten notes some times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only impediment is people who hand me printouts instead of sending me the original file.
After they send me the file, I recycle the paper.
Having worked from home for years, I can assure you that paperless is a no-brainer.
The only mail I got from the company was e-mail.I take that back though... I do use paper for handwritten notes some times.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559790</id>
	<title>Re:The paperless toilet.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269163500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Back in the 80s, I remember someone saying that a paperless office would be about as useful as the paperless toilet.</p><p>I'm not sure why I feel that this is true.  But I'm hoping this discussion will provide insight.</p></div><p>IT workers in offices in India and China pretty much tend to avoid paper in the office, just like they avoid paper in their toilets. It's obviously a cultural thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in the 80s , I remember someone saying that a paperless office would be about as useful as the paperless toilet.I 'm not sure why I feel that this is true .
But I 'm hoping this discussion will provide insight.IT workers in offices in India and China pretty much tend to avoid paper in the office , just like they avoid paper in their toilets .
It 's obviously a cultural thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in the 80s, I remember someone saying that a paperless office would be about as useful as the paperless toilet.I'm not sure why I feel that this is true.
But I'm hoping this discussion will provide insight.IT workers in offices in India and China pretty much tend to avoid paper in the office, just like they avoid paper in their toilets.
It's obviously a cultural thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560116</id>
	<title>Re:when was the last time</title>
	<author>basotl</author>
	<datestamp>1269165660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I carry my thumb drive with me every where but thanks for asking... well I have that and my Blackberry and Netbook.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I carry my thumb drive with me every where but thanks for asking... well I have that and my Blackberry and Netbook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I carry my thumb drive with me every where but thanks for asking... well I have that and my Blackberry and Netbook.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559918</id>
	<title>Twelve iPads</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1269164400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just off the top of my head, the main thing keeping me printing out documents is the ability to spread a dozen pages of a document under review out on my table and marking it up by hand.</p></div><p>Sounds like you need twelve or so iPads to digitize your workflow.  You could have twelve digital documents open at the same time, and they could move around in 3D space.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just off the top of my head , the main thing keeping me printing out documents is the ability to spread a dozen pages of a document under review out on my table and marking it up by hand.Sounds like you need twelve or so iPads to digitize your workflow .
You could have twelve digital documents open at the same time , and they could move around in 3D space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just off the top of my head, the main thing keeping me printing out documents is the ability to spread a dozen pages of a document under review out on my table and marking it up by hand.Sounds like you need twelve or so iPads to digitize your workflow.
You could have twelve digital documents open at the same time, and they could move around in 3D space.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31577130</id>
	<title>Re:My office is paperless for years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269260220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I have a scanner next to me, if I have a paper (like a manual on something I bought) I scan it and save. The paper manual may then be recycled. Less stuff to lay around and produce dust. </i> </p><p>I always keep the paper manual somewhere safe and out of the way. Except in cases like for my amateur radio gear, which I may need at a moment's notice -- e.g. when I may need to change an infrequently-used setting in an emergency situation. In addition to the paper copy, I also go, immediately after purchase, to the manufacturer's site to download PDFs of all owner's and service manuals.</p><p>I was recently amazed when I went to a manufacturer's site and was able to find the PDF of a user manual which I had lost -- it was for a twenty year old photographic light meter.</p><p>By the way, I've often found vendor sites have terrible search facilities. They seem to lose indexing on discontinued products, even when the information is still available. I recently wanted a manual, which was not listed on the vendor's site, for a product only a couple of years out of production. So I went to Google and found a current pointer to the item -- right there where the vendor's search was unable to find it. In other cases, Google has found me manuals that the vendor no longer had, but which someone else still had available online.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a scanner next to me , if I have a paper ( like a manual on something I bought ) I scan it and save .
The paper manual may then be recycled .
Less stuff to lay around and produce dust .
I always keep the paper manual somewhere safe and out of the way .
Except in cases like for my amateur radio gear , which I may need at a moment 's notice -- e.g .
when I may need to change an infrequently-used setting in an emergency situation .
In addition to the paper copy , I also go , immediately after purchase , to the manufacturer 's site to download PDFs of all owner 's and service manuals.I was recently amazed when I went to a manufacturer 's site and was able to find the PDF of a user manual which I had lost -- it was for a twenty year old photographic light meter.By the way , I 've often found vendor sites have terrible search facilities .
They seem to lose indexing on discontinued products , even when the information is still available .
I recently wanted a manual , which was not listed on the vendor 's site , for a product only a couple of years out of production .
So I went to Google and found a current pointer to the item -- right there where the vendor 's search was unable to find it .
In other cases , Google has found me manuals that the vendor no longer had , but which someone else still had available online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a scanner next to me, if I have a paper (like a manual on something I bought) I scan it and save.
The paper manual may then be recycled.
Less stuff to lay around and produce dust.
I always keep the paper manual somewhere safe and out of the way.
Except in cases like for my amateur radio gear, which I may need at a moment's notice -- e.g.
when I may need to change an infrequently-used setting in an emergency situation.
In addition to the paper copy, I also go, immediately after purchase, to the manufacturer's site to download PDFs of all owner's and service manuals.I was recently amazed when I went to a manufacturer's site and was able to find the PDF of a user manual which I had lost -- it was for a twenty year old photographic light meter.By the way, I've often found vendor sites have terrible search facilities.
They seem to lose indexing on discontinued products, even when the information is still available.
I recently wanted a manual, which was not listed on the vendor's site, for a product only a couple of years out of production.
So I went to Google and found a current pointer to the item -- right there where the vendor's search was unable to find it.
In other cases, Google has found me manuals that the vendor no longer had, but which someone else still had available online.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559904</id>
	<title>Re:Resistance Of Change</title>
	<author>hibiki\_r</author>
	<datestamp>1269164280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Beware, when the spear chuckers (defense 2) are veteran, fortified and on a mountain, they have even odds of beating your tank.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Beware , when the spear chuckers ( defense 2 ) are veteran , fortified and on a mountain , they have even odds of beating your tank .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Beware, when the spear chuckers (defense 2) are veteran, fortified and on a mountain, they have even odds of beating your tank.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559444</id>
	<title>Surface computing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A whole desk computer is what you need, with easy ways of sending someone a document.</p><p>Imagine if you had a meeting room and the whole desk was a computer, but you could effectively bring your own computer display over to the desk? No need to bring your laptop, no need to bring a notepad with you.</p><p>Ok, we will need to move away from WIMP to make this possible perhaps?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A whole desk computer is what you need , with easy ways of sending someone a document.Imagine if you had a meeting room and the whole desk was a computer , but you could effectively bring your own computer display over to the desk ?
No need to bring your laptop , no need to bring a notepad with you.Ok , we will need to move away from WIMP to make this possible perhaps ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A whole desk computer is what you need, with easy ways of sending someone a document.Imagine if you had a meeting room and the whole desk was a computer, but you could effectively bring your own computer display over to the desk?
No need to bring your laptop, no need to bring a notepad with you.Ok, we will need to move away from WIMP to make this possible perhaps?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31576528</id>
	<title>86 the printers</title>
	<author>lastrogue</author>
	<datestamp>1269257040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Easiest way... Remove the printers from the office. That's what they did in my office. one day without warning Field Service just yanked it. its very rare that I have to print something out so if I need to I switch to a secondary network I have access to and print from there. but let me tell you removing the printers not only saved cost in paper and ink but removed the problems of having to reset print spoolers on servers and complaining to Field Services to fix them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Easiest way... Remove the printers from the office .
That 's what they did in my office .
one day without warning Field Service just yanked it .
its very rare that I have to print something out so if I need to I switch to a secondary network I have access to and print from there .
but let me tell you removing the printers not only saved cost in paper and ink but removed the problems of having to reset print spoolers on servers and complaining to Field Services to fix them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Easiest way... Remove the printers from the office.
That's what they did in my office.
one day without warning Field Service just yanked it.
its very rare that I have to print something out so if I need to I switch to a secondary network I have access to and print from there.
but let me tell you removing the printers not only saved cost in paper and ink but removed the problems of having to reset print spoolers on servers and complaining to Field Services to fix them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562886</id>
	<title>Yeah but</title>
	<author>rsilvergun</author>
	<datestamp>1269186120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>my boss can't read all my stickies and see how much work I'm shirking. At least, not with my handwriting he can't.</htmltext>
<tokenext>my boss ca n't read all my stickies and see how much work I 'm shirking .
At least , not with my handwriting he ca n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>my boss can't read all my stickies and see how much work I'm shirking.
At least, not with my handwriting he can't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561268</id>
	<title>Re:The paperless toilet.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269173520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you're saying the Asians are going to beat us at getting to the paperless office?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're saying the Asians are going to beat us at getting to the paperless office ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're saying the Asians are going to beat us at getting to the paperless office?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565262</id>
	<title>The concept of 'document' is wrong.</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1269261360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The concept of 'document' is wrong when it comes to computers. The paperless office will not materialize if information is not stopped being distributed in the form of 'documents'.</p><p>The problem has been worsened by long time use of word processors that make document creation easy, thus allowing people to cram all the relevant information about a task in a document. And since information is in a document, people prefer to hold a physical copy in their hands, because the paper seems less annoying than the screen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The concept of 'document ' is wrong when it comes to computers .
The paperless office will not materialize if information is not stopped being distributed in the form of 'documents'.The problem has been worsened by long time use of word processors that make document creation easy , thus allowing people to cram all the relevant information about a task in a document .
And since information is in a document , people prefer to hold a physical copy in their hands , because the paper seems less annoying than the screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The concept of 'document' is wrong when it comes to computers.
The paperless office will not materialize if information is not stopped being distributed in the form of 'documents'.The problem has been worsened by long time use of word processors that make document creation easy, thus allowing people to cram all the relevant information about a task in a document.
And since information is in a document, people prefer to hold a physical copy in their hands, because the paper seems less annoying than the screen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560092</id>
	<title>Simple - it's people</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1269165480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My department has a few people who insist on using paper when the paperless equivalent would be significantly less work. I've set up simple online form systems that replace a lot of this paper functionality for the vast majority of my co-workers; but a couple people are stuck on paper, even though it ends up making that particular process (registering items with our equipment inventory, for example) take more steps involving more people.</p><p>It continues to happen because the people insisting on sticking with "the old way" are all senior, and there's no political will to force them to change. I'm not young - I'm in my late 40s - but I find it ridiculous how some older people just refuse to even try something new that requires them to briefly step out of their comfort zone. What's really odd is we have some other situations - notably payroll - where we've managed to force the issue, and they all say the online version is so much better than their old way of doing things; but somehow in their brains it still doesn't occur to them that maybe, if they'd just <i>try</i> some of the other new systems, they might find those work better for them as well!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My department has a few people who insist on using paper when the paperless equivalent would be significantly less work .
I 've set up simple online form systems that replace a lot of this paper functionality for the vast majority of my co-workers ; but a couple people are stuck on paper , even though it ends up making that particular process ( registering items with our equipment inventory , for example ) take more steps involving more people.It continues to happen because the people insisting on sticking with " the old way " are all senior , and there 's no political will to force them to change .
I 'm not young - I 'm in my late 40s - but I find it ridiculous how some older people just refuse to even try something new that requires them to briefly step out of their comfort zone .
What 's really odd is we have some other situations - notably payroll - where we 've managed to force the issue , and they all say the online version is so much better than their old way of doing things ; but somehow in their brains it still does n't occur to them that maybe , if they 'd just try some of the other new systems , they might find those work better for them as well !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My department has a few people who insist on using paper when the paperless equivalent would be significantly less work.
I've set up simple online form systems that replace a lot of this paper functionality for the vast majority of my co-workers; but a couple people are stuck on paper, even though it ends up making that particular process (registering items with our equipment inventory, for example) take more steps involving more people.It continues to happen because the people insisting on sticking with "the old way" are all senior, and there's no political will to force them to change.
I'm not young - I'm in my late 40s - but I find it ridiculous how some older people just refuse to even try something new that requires them to briefly step out of their comfort zone.
What's really odd is we have some other situations - notably payroll - where we've managed to force the issue, and they all say the online version is so much better than their old way of doing things; but somehow in their brains it still doesn't occur to them that maybe, if they'd just try some of the other new systems, they might find those work better for them as well!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564916</id>
	<title>You want Vannevar Bush's Memex</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1269255840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="http://sjc.blog.uvm.edu/archives/memex-1.jpg" title="uvm.edu">http://sjc.blog.uvm.edu/archives/memex-1.jpg</a> [uvm.edu]</p><p>Something like this?  Designed/envisioned in 1945<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex [ wikipedia.org ] and http : //sjc.blog.uvm.edu/archives/memex-1.jpg [ uvm.edu ] Something like this ?
Designed/envisioned in 1945 : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memex [wikipedia.org] and http://sjc.blog.uvm.edu/archives/memex-1.jpg [uvm.edu]Something like this?
Designed/envisioned in 1945 :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624</id>
	<title>Prices &amp; UI...</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1269162360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paper is incredibly cheap...</p><p>At ~1 cent per page, how many reams of paper would it take to pay off a single tablet/eBook reader for a single person?<br>Answer: "Too many"</p><p>Tablets, so far, have been far too geared for the high end...  Luxury devices.  Meanwhile, the essentially free "Personal Organizers" that were flying off the shelves close to 10 years ago now, had everything needed, just in too small dimensions...</p><p>In short, once someone sells a 7" display, with decent pen-input, basic wireless, and a stupid-simple UI, for perhaps $25, then you'll see the last stronghold of paper fall away.</p><p>Until then, it will continue to be a trade-off...  Is e-mailing this report okay, or will it need to be referenced in the next meeting, or by someone as they're walking around?  Often, it's cost more to take the time to figure that out, than the cost of continuing to print it...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper is incredibly cheap...At ~ 1 cent per page , how many reams of paper would it take to pay off a single tablet/eBook reader for a single person ? Answer : " Too many " Tablets , so far , have been far too geared for the high end... Luxury devices .
Meanwhile , the essentially free " Personal Organizers " that were flying off the shelves close to 10 years ago now , had everything needed , just in too small dimensions...In short , once someone sells a 7 " display , with decent pen-input , basic wireless , and a stupid-simple UI , for perhaps $ 25 , then you 'll see the last stronghold of paper fall away.Until then , it will continue to be a trade-off... Is e-mailing this report okay , or will it need to be referenced in the next meeting , or by someone as they 're walking around ?
Often , it 's cost more to take the time to figure that out , than the cost of continuing to print it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper is incredibly cheap...At ~1 cent per page, how many reams of paper would it take to pay off a single tablet/eBook reader for a single person?Answer: "Too many"Tablets, so far, have been far too geared for the high end...  Luxury devices.
Meanwhile, the essentially free "Personal Organizers" that were flying off the shelves close to 10 years ago now, had everything needed, just in too small dimensions...In short, once someone sells a 7" display, with decent pen-input, basic wireless, and a stupid-simple UI, for perhaps $25, then you'll see the last stronghold of paper fall away.Until then, it will continue to be a trade-off...  Is e-mailing this report okay, or will it need to be referenced in the next meeting, or by someone as they're walking around?
Often, it's cost more to take the time to figure that out, than the cost of continuing to print it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562896</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>pz</author>
	<datestamp>1269186120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it.  Contrast that to Windows.</p><p>When push comes to shove, I can always get a paper form to the person that needs it.  Contrast that to relying on an Exchange server.</p><p>When a form needs authorization, having the right person sign it with a pen always works.  Contrast that to trying to get digital signatures to work.</p></div><p>Speed, too.  It takes how long to sign a document, either digitally or by imposing a scanned signature, as compared with raising a pen and making your scrawl?</p><p>I have to send scanned, signed papers around my institution pretty frequently.  It's almost faster to carry a signed piece of paper to my boss's office two buildings over than it is to do it all electronically.  If his office was just a few doors down from mine, I would NEVER do it electronically.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never had my desk crash , losing all pieces of paper on it .
Contrast that to Windows.When push comes to shove , I can always get a paper form to the person that needs it .
Contrast that to relying on an Exchange server.When a form needs authorization , having the right person sign it with a pen always works .
Contrast that to trying to get digital signatures to work.Speed , too .
It takes how long to sign a document , either digitally or by imposing a scanned signature , as compared with raising a pen and making your scrawl ? I have to send scanned , signed papers around my institution pretty frequently .
It 's almost faster to carry a signed piece of paper to my boss 's office two buildings over than it is to do it all electronically .
If his office was just a few doors down from mine , I would NEVER do it electronically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it.
Contrast that to Windows.When push comes to shove, I can always get a paper form to the person that needs it.
Contrast that to relying on an Exchange server.When a form needs authorization, having the right person sign it with a pen always works.
Contrast that to trying to get digital signatures to work.Speed, too.
It takes how long to sign a document, either digitally or by imposing a scanned signature, as compared with raising a pen and making your scrawl?I have to send scanned, signed papers around my institution pretty frequently.
It's almost faster to carry a signed piece of paper to my boss's office two buildings over than it is to do it all electronically.
If his office was just a few doors down from mine, I would NEVER do it electronically.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559530</id>
	<title>Well what holds the paperless office might be...</title>
	<author>garompeta</author>
	<datestamp>1269204780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...Staples?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Staples ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Staples?
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294</id>
	<title>Drawing</title>
	<author>Lord Lode</author>
	<datestamp>1269203220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes when working on some algorithmical or mathematical problem, I draw stuff on paper to visualize the problem better and find the solution. Drawing on a computer screen will never replace drawing with a pen on paper for that purpose for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes when working on some algorithmical or mathematical problem , I draw stuff on paper to visualize the problem better and find the solution .
Drawing on a computer screen will never replace drawing with a pen on paper for that purpose for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes when working on some algorithmical or mathematical problem, I draw stuff on paper to visualize the problem better and find the solution.
Drawing on a computer screen will never replace drawing with a pen on paper for that purpose for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560034</id>
	<title>It's simple!</title>
	<author>CFBMoo1</author>
	<datestamp>1269165060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When problems like this:<br><br>http://ask.slashdot.org/story/10/03/21/0849241/Need-Help-Salvaging-Data-From-an-Old-Xenix-System?art\_pos=8<br><br>Don't exist anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When problems like this : http : //ask.slashdot.org/story/10/03/21/0849241/Need-Help-Salvaging-Data-From-an-Old-Xenix-System ? art \ _pos = 8Do n't exist anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When problems like this:http://ask.slashdot.org/story/10/03/21/0849241/Need-Help-Salvaging-Data-From-an-Old-Xenix-System?art\_pos=8Don't exist anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559318</id>
	<title>Doodles</title>
	<author>hivebrain</author>
	<datestamp>1269203340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>When Word or Acrobat allows me to draw 3D boxes and other geometric shapes in the margins of docs, then we'll talk.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When Word or Acrobat allows me to draw 3D boxes and other geometric shapes in the margins of docs , then we 'll talk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When Word or Acrobat allows me to draw 3D boxes and other geometric shapes in the margins of docs, then we'll talk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564608</id>
	<title>We have a paperless office</title>
	<author>Phloebas</author>
	<datestamp>1269250560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our CEO is extremely tree-friendly, and so we are discouraged from printing anything.  I'd say we have about the most paperless office I've ever seen.  I almost never print anything, and can go two weeks without doing so.

As revolting as it is, we use Lotus Notes 6.5 (I know there are better things, but we've built ourselves around it and are now stuck with it) and I find the markup on Word works well for me (and I review a lot of documents).  In fact, my job involves document management, and so you would expect me to print a lot - yet I don't.

We've evolved a culture where if someone actually prints something out to show to people or mark up, they're considered a bit backward, and are shunned appropriately.  I'd say the average employee prints about 10 pages a month, tops, in our office.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our CEO is extremely tree-friendly , and so we are discouraged from printing anything .
I 'd say we have about the most paperless office I 've ever seen .
I almost never print anything , and can go two weeks without doing so .
As revolting as it is , we use Lotus Notes 6.5 ( I know there are better things , but we 've built ourselves around it and are now stuck with it ) and I find the markup on Word works well for me ( and I review a lot of documents ) .
In fact , my job involves document management , and so you would expect me to print a lot - yet I do n't .
We 've evolved a culture where if someone actually prints something out to show to people or mark up , they 're considered a bit backward , and are shunned appropriately .
I 'd say the average employee prints about 10 pages a month , tops , in our office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our CEO is extremely tree-friendly, and so we are discouraged from printing anything.
I'd say we have about the most paperless office I've ever seen.
I almost never print anything, and can go two weeks without doing so.
As revolting as it is, we use Lotus Notes 6.5 (I know there are better things, but we've built ourselves around it and are now stuck with it) and I find the markup on Word works well for me (and I review a lot of documents).
In fact, my job involves document management, and so you would expect me to print a lot - yet I don't.
We've evolved a culture where if someone actually prints something out to show to people or mark up, they're considered a bit backward, and are shunned appropriately.
I'd say the average employee prints about 10 pages a month, tops, in our office.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562986</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269186900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work in one of your named industry examples and I can tell you with 100\% certainty that once the switch was made we did not keep any physically tangible copies (paper, microfiche etc) after that point in time. We do instead have a rather elaborate system of backup digital copies in the event the source digital file is somehow lost or damaged.</p><p>On a side note, I have to stop commenting in threads when I have mod points.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in one of your named industry examples and I can tell you with 100 \ % certainty that once the switch was made we did not keep any physically tangible copies ( paper , microfiche etc ) after that point in time .
We do instead have a rather elaborate system of backup digital copies in the event the source digital file is somehow lost or damaged.On a side note , I have to stop commenting in threads when I have mod points .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in one of your named industry examples and I can tell you with 100\% certainty that once the switch was made we did not keep any physically tangible copies (paper, microfiche etc) after that point in time.
We do instead have a rather elaborate system of backup digital copies in the event the source digital file is somehow lost or damaged.On a side note, I have to stop commenting in threads when I have mod points.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563136</id>
	<title>Re:Resistance Of Change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269188160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I never had to LEARN the use of sticky notes.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never had to LEARN the use of sticky notes.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never had to LEARN the use of sticky notes.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559408</id>
	<title>We've been talking about this a lot lately</title>
	<author>raddan</author>
	<datestamp>1269204120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>primarily because a paper-based process is tremendously wasteful, expensive, and it cannot take advantage of many efficiencies of keeping documents in the digital domain.  For our Boston office alone, we spend tens of thousands of dollars each year on paper, ink, and printer/photocopier maintenance.
<br> <br>
What it mostly comes down to for us is screen real-estate; the ability to work from multiple documents at once is essential.  We are piloting some very large monitors now (24"+), and the things we're discovering were somewhat unexpected from the IT staff's perspective.  Most people, but especially older workers, intensely dislike the large screens.
<br> <br>
Their complaints are along the lines of "it's too big" and "sensory overload".  It seems that, with their previous displays, which were 15" LCDs, people could tuck their monitor away, and use the computer to augment their work.  People universally liked moving from 15" CRTs to 15" LCDs because it made the computer even less obtrusive.  However, a shift to a digital workflow is really quite a change, and the large screen reinforces that.  It immediately confronts people with the fact that they really have to work <em>on the computer</em> now.  Younger employees seem very eager to do this, but older employees, some of whom have worked with a paper process for 20+ years, really do not like this idea at all, and have even recently made childish proclamations like "I reserve the right to print something anytime I want!"
<br> <br>
My sense is that this attitude will eventually pass, but it may be a generational thing.  As younger employees move into more senior positions, we'll probably see paper go away.  Obviously, I'm generalizing here, because some older employees, especially our graphic designers, LOVE the big screens.  Their process has been entirely computer based for a long time already.  Given that most of the actual work is done by younger employees, we may find ourselves giving the less senior people big screens, and let the more senior people keep what they have.  They spend most of their time in meetings anyhow.</htmltext>
<tokenext>primarily because a paper-based process is tremendously wasteful , expensive , and it can not take advantage of many efficiencies of keeping documents in the digital domain .
For our Boston office alone , we spend tens of thousands of dollars each year on paper , ink , and printer/photocopier maintenance .
What it mostly comes down to for us is screen real-estate ; the ability to work from multiple documents at once is essential .
We are piloting some very large monitors now ( 24 " + ) , and the things we 're discovering were somewhat unexpected from the IT staff 's perspective .
Most people , but especially older workers , intensely dislike the large screens .
Their complaints are along the lines of " it 's too big " and " sensory overload " .
It seems that , with their previous displays , which were 15 " LCDs , people could tuck their monitor away , and use the computer to augment their work .
People universally liked moving from 15 " CRTs to 15 " LCDs because it made the computer even less obtrusive .
However , a shift to a digital workflow is really quite a change , and the large screen reinforces that .
It immediately confronts people with the fact that they really have to work on the computer now .
Younger employees seem very eager to do this , but older employees , some of whom have worked with a paper process for 20 + years , really do not like this idea at all , and have even recently made childish proclamations like " I reserve the right to print something anytime I want !
" My sense is that this attitude will eventually pass , but it may be a generational thing .
As younger employees move into more senior positions , we 'll probably see paper go away .
Obviously , I 'm generalizing here , because some older employees , especially our graphic designers , LOVE the big screens .
Their process has been entirely computer based for a long time already .
Given that most of the actual work is done by younger employees , we may find ourselves giving the less senior people big screens , and let the more senior people keep what they have .
They spend most of their time in meetings anyhow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>primarily because a paper-based process is tremendously wasteful, expensive, and it cannot take advantage of many efficiencies of keeping documents in the digital domain.
For our Boston office alone, we spend tens of thousands of dollars each year on paper, ink, and printer/photocopier maintenance.
What it mostly comes down to for us is screen real-estate; the ability to work from multiple documents at once is essential.
We are piloting some very large monitors now (24"+), and the things we're discovering were somewhat unexpected from the IT staff's perspective.
Most people, but especially older workers, intensely dislike the large screens.
Their complaints are along the lines of "it's too big" and "sensory overload".
It seems that, with their previous displays, which were 15" LCDs, people could tuck their monitor away, and use the computer to augment their work.
People universally liked moving from 15" CRTs to 15" LCDs because it made the computer even less obtrusive.
However, a shift to a digital workflow is really quite a change, and the large screen reinforces that.
It immediately confronts people with the fact that they really have to work on the computer now.
Younger employees seem very eager to do this, but older employees, some of whom have worked with a paper process for 20+ years, really do not like this idea at all, and have even recently made childish proclamations like "I reserve the right to print something anytime I want!
"
 
My sense is that this attitude will eventually pass, but it may be a generational thing.
As younger employees move into more senior positions, we'll probably see paper go away.
Obviously, I'm generalizing here, because some older employees, especially our graphic designers, LOVE the big screens.
Their process has been entirely computer based for a long time already.
Given that most of the actual work is done by younger employees, we may find ourselves giving the less senior people big screens, and let the more senior people keep what they have.
They spend most of their time in meetings anyhow.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>zuzulo</author>
	<datestamp>1269203880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only one thing, really. Contracts and other signed documents. As far as i know there is no way to electronically sign formal contracts in a generally accepted fashion. If that capability was available i would never use faxes/scanners or paper again except in very rare circumstances<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>Anyone have a good approach to the legal signature problem?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only one thing , really .
Contracts and other signed documents .
As far as i know there is no way to electronically sign formal contracts in a generally accepted fashion .
If that capability was available i would never use faxes/scanners or paper again except in very rare circumstances ...Anyone have a good approach to the legal signature problem ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only one thing, really.
Contracts and other signed documents.
As far as i know there is no way to electronically sign formal contracts in a generally accepted fashion.
If that capability was available i would never use faxes/scanners or paper again except in very rare circumstances ...Anyone have a good approach to the legal signature problem?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560508</id>
	<title>Storage</title>
	<author>BCW2</author>
	<datestamp>1269168240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is nothing yet in the electronic world with the reliability and durability of paper for stored records.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is nothing yet in the electronic world with the reliability and durability of paper for stored records .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is nothing yet in the electronic world with the reliability and durability of paper for stored records.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564164</id>
	<title>Old People are Holding Back the paperless Office</title>
	<author>thatkid\_2002</author>
	<datestamp>1269199680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There. I said it.
<br>
Get off my lawn you old farts, and stop making stupid rules which unfairly target young people!</htmltext>
<tokenext>There .
I said it .
Get off my lawn you old farts , and stop making stupid rules which unfairly target young people !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There.
I said it.
Get off my lawn you old farts, and stop making stupid rules which unfairly target young people!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562268</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269181080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Water is a scarce resource in many parts of the world. Heck its a scarce resource in many parts of the US too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Water is a scarce resource in many parts of the world .
Heck its a scarce resource in many parts of the US too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Water is a scarce resource in many parts of the world.
Heck its a scarce resource in many parts of the US too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561580</id>
	<title>Electronic signatures are legal and common</title>
	<author>sjbe</author>
	<datestamp>1269176280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As far as i know there is no way to electronically sign formal contracts in a generally accepted fashion.</p></div><p>This hasn't been true for some years now.  See the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform\_Electronic\_Transactions\_Act" title="wikipedia.org">Uniform Electronic Transactions Act</a> [wikipedia.org] and the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic\_Signatures\_in\_Global\_and\_National\_Commerce\_Act" title="wikipedia.org">Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act</a> [wikipedia.org].  Contracts can be formalized by signature, words or even actions.  There are cases where the parties involved require a paper signed but there is no universal legal requirement for that to be the case.  Heck, every time I go to the grocery store I sign a digital signature pad - there is no paper signature involved and I guarantee you that is a legally binding contract.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as i know there is no way to electronically sign formal contracts in a generally accepted fashion.This has n't been true for some years now .
See the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act [ wikipedia.org ] and the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act [ wikipedia.org ] .
Contracts can be formalized by signature , words or even actions .
There are cases where the parties involved require a paper signed but there is no universal legal requirement for that to be the case .
Heck , every time I go to the grocery store I sign a digital signature pad - there is no paper signature involved and I guarantee you that is a legally binding contract .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as i know there is no way to electronically sign formal contracts in a generally accepted fashion.This hasn't been true for some years now.
See the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act [wikipedia.org] and the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act [wikipedia.org].
Contracts can be formalized by signature, words or even actions.
There are cases where the parties involved require a paper signed but there is no universal legal requirement for that to be the case.
Heck, every time I go to the grocery store I sign a digital signature pad - there is no paper signature involved and I guarantee you that is a legally binding contract.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564</id>
	<title>A couple of things</title>
	<author>Todd Knarr</author>
	<datestamp>1269205080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some of the reasons I still use paper:
</p><ol>
<li>Off-line use. I can refer to paper copies and make notes on them even when I'm not around the computer.</li><li>Audit trail. Most document-management systems and e-mail systems have document retention policies that're under someone else's control. Sometimes I need to control copies of the documents independently of company policies (eg. anything related to HR, records that might prove inconvenient for management later (like my detailing of exactly why something they want to do is a Bad Idea), etc.).</li><li>Change control. Many times documents can be changed in the computer and, while it records that there was a change, there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change. The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that <i>was</i> what was originally specified.</li><li>Space. My desk's a lot bigger than the computer monitor, and I can lay out a lot more papers and diagrams on it than I can have visible on the monitor at one time. Very useful, that.</li><li>Reliability. I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going <i>*poof*</i> when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.</li></ol></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of the reasons I still use paper : Off-line use .
I can refer to paper copies and make notes on them even when I 'm not around the computer.Audit trail .
Most document-management systems and e-mail systems have document retention policies that 're under someone else 's control .
Sometimes I need to control copies of the documents independently of company policies ( eg .
anything related to HR , records that might prove inconvenient for management later ( like my detailing of exactly why something they want to do is a Bad Idea ) , etc .
) .Change control .
Many times documents can be changed in the computer and , while it records that there was a change , there 's no record anymore of what the document said before the change .
The paper copies in my drawer ca n't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified.Space .
My desk 's a lot bigger than the computer monitor , and I can lay out a lot more papers and diagrams on it than I can have visible on the monitor at one time .
Very useful , that.Reliability .
I do n't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going * poof * when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT ca n't afford to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of the reasons I still use paper:

Off-line use.
I can refer to paper copies and make notes on them even when I'm not around the computer.Audit trail.
Most document-management systems and e-mail systems have document retention policies that're under someone else's control.
Sometimes I need to control copies of the documents independently of company policies (eg.
anything related to HR, records that might prove inconvenient for management later (like my detailing of exactly why something they want to do is a Bad Idea), etc.
).Change control.
Many times documents can be changed in the computer and, while it records that there was a change, there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change.
The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified.Space.
My desk's a lot bigger than the computer monitor, and I can lay out a lot more papers and diagrams on it than I can have visible on the monitor at one time.
Very useful, that.Reliability.
I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going *poof* when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559396</id>
	<title>It's half solved</title>
	<author>jgreco</author>
	<datestamp>1269204060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've had flatbed scanners for a long time, auto-feeding, etc.  Way back, scanning was very manual and OCR took a Really Long Time.  That was a turnoff for many years.</p><p>These days, there are really good scanners out there (we just picked up a Fujitsu ScanSnap S1400) and the OCR isn't too painful on a modern box.  The ScanSnap is color and double-sided with a large ADF - and blazing fast.  I cannot picture too many improvements, except maybe a scanner that would unfold paper and remove staples...  but the sticking point is still document management and access.</p><p>We're part of the way there.  The largest remaining problems are software and people.</p><p>The upside?  A banker's box of papers can be consolidated onto a quarter of a DVD - all searchable.  I want that.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had flatbed scanners for a long time , auto-feeding , etc .
Way back , scanning was very manual and OCR took a Really Long Time .
That was a turnoff for many years.These days , there are really good scanners out there ( we just picked up a Fujitsu ScanSnap S1400 ) and the OCR is n't too painful on a modern box .
The ScanSnap is color and double-sided with a large ADF - and blazing fast .
I can not picture too many improvements , except maybe a scanner that would unfold paper and remove staples... but the sticking point is still document management and access.We 're part of the way there .
The largest remaining problems are software and people.The upside ?
A banker 's box of papers can be consolidated onto a quarter of a DVD - all searchable .
I want that .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had flatbed scanners for a long time, auto-feeding, etc.
Way back, scanning was very manual and OCR took a Really Long Time.
That was a turnoff for many years.These days, there are really good scanners out there (we just picked up a Fujitsu ScanSnap S1400) and the OCR isn't too painful on a modern box.
The ScanSnap is color and double-sided with a large ADF - and blazing fast.
I cannot picture too many improvements, except maybe a scanner that would unfold paper and remove staples...  but the sticking point is still document management and access.We're part of the way there.
The largest remaining problems are software and people.The upside?
A banker's box of papers can be consolidated onto a quarter of a DVD - all searchable.
I want that.
:-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562582</id>
	<title>People Like Paper</title>
	<author>kdekorte</author>
	<datestamp>1269183540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People like working with paper. They can make notes, cross out large sections, tear it up...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People like working with paper .
They can make notes , cross out large sections , tear it up.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People like working with paper.
They can make notes, cross out large sections, tear it up...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559776</id>
	<title>Re:Workflow</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1269163380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I think of paperless, what I think of is most things that used to waste paper, like memos, policy manuals, and interdepartmental transfers not going over computers. For the most part this is happening.  Brainstorming, sketches, reminders on post it notes(which by the way is a contemporary with the electronic computer) are going to stay.  Think of this way.  We have the electric typewriter for almost 100 years in some form, yet we still use a graphite stick, 400 year old technology.
<p>
The other thing is the speed in which the education system incorporates technology.  There are people 40 and older, and some younger, who never used a computer until college or when they started working.  Even today a student is lucky to get an hour or two on the computer.  If we are going to have paperless office, then people must be trained to work problems using the computer.  If every paper a student writes and every equation a student solve and every design a student does in on paper, then that is the way the student will primarily solve problem for life.  However, if there are enough computer around so the student can write on the computer, set up in solution to equations in LaTeX, design in Sketchup or Autodesk, then we would see more people not using paper.
p.
Which does not mean paper will go away.  I can do most of my work on the computer, but that does not mean that I don't have many doodles and equations and drawing on paper in addition to many paper notebooks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I think of paperless , what I think of is most things that used to waste paper , like memos , policy manuals , and interdepartmental transfers not going over computers .
For the most part this is happening .
Brainstorming , sketches , reminders on post it notes ( which by the way is a contemporary with the electronic computer ) are going to stay .
Think of this way .
We have the electric typewriter for almost 100 years in some form , yet we still use a graphite stick , 400 year old technology .
The other thing is the speed in which the education system incorporates technology .
There are people 40 and older , and some younger , who never used a computer until college or when they started working .
Even today a student is lucky to get an hour or two on the computer .
If we are going to have paperless office , then people must be trained to work problems using the computer .
If every paper a student writes and every equation a student solve and every design a student does in on paper , then that is the way the student will primarily solve problem for life .
However , if there are enough computer around so the student can write on the computer , set up in solution to equations in LaTeX , design in Sketchup or Autodesk , then we would see more people not using paper .
p . Which does not mean paper will go away .
I can do most of my work on the computer , but that does not mean that I do n't have many doodles and equations and drawing on paper in addition to many paper notebooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I think of paperless, what I think of is most things that used to waste paper, like memos, policy manuals, and interdepartmental transfers not going over computers.
For the most part this is happening.
Brainstorming, sketches, reminders on post it notes(which by the way is a contemporary with the electronic computer) are going to stay.
Think of this way.
We have the electric typewriter for almost 100 years in some form, yet we still use a graphite stick, 400 year old technology.
The other thing is the speed in which the education system incorporates technology.
There are people 40 and older, and some younger, who never used a computer until college or when they started working.
Even today a student is lucky to get an hour or two on the computer.
If we are going to have paperless office, then people must be trained to work problems using the computer.
If every paper a student writes and every equation a student solve and every design a student does in on paper, then that is the way the student will primarily solve problem for life.
However, if there are enough computer around so the student can write on the computer, set up in solution to equations in LaTeX, design in Sketchup or Autodesk, then we would see more people not using paper.
p.
Which does not mean paper will go away.
I can do most of my work on the computer, but that does not mean that I don't have many doodles and equations and drawing on paper in addition to many paper notebooks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382</id>
	<title>Workflow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269203940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work in an architecture/engineering office. Each department has its engineers/architects and its CAD technicians/designers. Our typical workflow has the engineer, ie me, quickly drawing out what I want on a blank plan, and the CAD guys make it happen so I can move on to other things. If I was going to draw what I wanted in the computer anyway, why do we need CAD guys? (hint: they are less expensive per hour, to be cynical. But that lets us get more work done overall).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in an architecture/engineering office .
Each department has its engineers/architects and its CAD technicians/designers .
Our typical workflow has the engineer , ie me , quickly drawing out what I want on a blank plan , and the CAD guys make it happen so I can move on to other things .
If I was going to draw what I wanted in the computer anyway , why do we need CAD guys ?
( hint : they are less expensive per hour , to be cynical .
But that lets us get more work done overall ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in an architecture/engineering office.
Each department has its engineers/architects and its CAD technicians/designers.
Our typical workflow has the engineer, ie me, quickly drawing out what I want on a blank plan, and the CAD guys make it happen so I can move on to other things.
If I was going to draw what I wanted in the computer anyway, why do we need CAD guys?
(hint: they are less expensive per hour, to be cynical.
But that lets us get more work done overall).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559428</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not technically true a lot of the time, as there are solutions that have been approved for those situations. But practically speaking this might as well be true, because those systems are so expensive and troublesome to implement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not technically true a lot of the time , as there are solutions that have been approved for those situations .
But practically speaking this might as well be true , because those systems are so expensive and troublesome to implement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not technically true a lot of the time, as there are solutions that have been approved for those situations.
But practically speaking this might as well be true, because those systems are so expensive and troublesome to implement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560484</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269168120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder how much paper has been printed about articles about the 'Paperless Office'?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>P.S.  Please don't print this comment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how much paper has been printed about articles about the 'Paperless Office ' ?
; - ) P.S. Please do n't print this comment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how much paper has been printed about articles about the 'Paperless Office'?
;-)P.S.  Please don't print this comment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561272</id>
	<title>Paper = cheap display</title>
	<author>genik76</author>
	<datestamp>1269173580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's the cost. Having a printed piece of paper is basically like an additional display - costing only fractions of cents. When displays get as cheap and easy to use, we'll have the paperless office.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the cost .
Having a printed piece of paper is basically like an additional display - costing only fractions of cents .
When displays get as cheap and easy to use , we 'll have the paperless office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the cost.
Having a printed piece of paper is basically like an additional display - costing only fractions of cents.
When displays get as cheap and easy to use, we'll have the paperless office.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564868</id>
	<title>Oblig. unfair slagging of windows (funny, though)</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1269255180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it. Contrast that to Windows.</p></div><p>Yeah, but you don't hand-write your notes on used toilet paper either, do you?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never had my desk crash , losing all pieces of paper on it .
Contrast that to Windows.Yeah , but you do n't hand-write your notes on used toilet paper either , do you ?
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it.
Contrast that to Windows.Yeah, but you don't hand-write your notes on used toilet paper either, do you?
;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559866</id>
	<title>Mainly technology</title>
	<author>ErichTheRed</author>
	<datestamp>1269164100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of people are saying that human nature is the problem, but I think it's that combined with technological limitations.</p><p>First, the human nature factor is getting to be less and less of an issue. Younger people in the workforce don't seem to care about permanent records not being printed, and the number of filing cabinets in most offices has gone way down. The human "need" for having a piece of paper in-hand has decreased, but people are (understandably) worried about some of the technology related issues:</p><ul><li> <b>Archival and Storage</b> - Even the most staunch advocate of paperless recordkeeping understands that digital formats come and go. Just try to find a way to read data off 8" or even 5.25" floppies these days. And even if you get the files off, good luck finding the software that created them. Open file formats are a good remedy to the first problem, and I think their adoption is going to drive a lot of archiving projects. However, someone has to remember to turn over the media every n years (I forget how long CD-ROMs are supposed to be good for, but to keep something for &gt;100 years, you need to convert it from CD-ROM to BluRay to GreenRay+ to SuperFlexiDisk2.0 to EQM (Embedded Quantum Memory.) Paper, if stored in a cold dry place, is still readable after hundreds of years unless someone burns the place down. So yeah, finding self-renewing and error-compensating storage media is a big one.</li><li> <b>Lack of IT Competence</b> - Face it, even good system admins forget about backups every now and then. Home users never back up, which explains the long lines at the Geek Squad counter at Best Buy of nervous people clutching their precious 2 TB external storage tank that has every photo they ever took on it. Until IT evolves a little and establishes archival standards that aren't some storage vendor's flavor of the week, we'll always have the "all data lost" kind of system failure.</li><li> <b>Screen technology still sucks.</b> - There's a reason optometrists invented the term "computer glasses." We're a long way from flickering CRTs, but even the best LCD will ruin your eyes staring at the backlight for 8 hours a day. A lot of people either can't or don't want to stare at the monitor to read long-form stuff. The Kindle screen is a good start (no backlight,) but the text can be fuzzy compared to a 1200 dpi printout.</li><li> <b>"Important" stuff still gets printed. </b> - Anything you need to keep (citizenship records, real estate deeds, tax information, etc.) gets printed out for the simple reason that it would be a huge pain to try replacing it. Here's a really good example - I just changed jobs a few months ago, and my employer has switched to electronic paystubs. My access to all that information is now gone. If I want my paystubs, I have to call the HR department, they'd have to print out each one and mail it to me.</li></ul><p>I'd say given one more generation and some major improvements, we could get rid of most printed documents. Until then, HP is still going to rake in the bucks on printers and toner. We already have way less paper floating around - the legal and medical professions are the only ones still "innovating" in the paper filing arena. Electronic bank statements, loan payments, and all that stuff means a whole lot less paper being mailed from place to place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of people are saying that human nature is the problem , but I think it 's that combined with technological limitations.First , the human nature factor is getting to be less and less of an issue .
Younger people in the workforce do n't seem to care about permanent records not being printed , and the number of filing cabinets in most offices has gone way down .
The human " need " for having a piece of paper in-hand has decreased , but people are ( understandably ) worried about some of the technology related issues : Archival and Storage - Even the most staunch advocate of paperless recordkeeping understands that digital formats come and go .
Just try to find a way to read data off 8 " or even 5.25 " floppies these days .
And even if you get the files off , good luck finding the software that created them .
Open file formats are a good remedy to the first problem , and I think their adoption is going to drive a lot of archiving projects .
However , someone has to remember to turn over the media every n years ( I forget how long CD-ROMs are supposed to be good for , but to keep something for &gt; 100 years , you need to convert it from CD-ROM to BluRay to GreenRay + to SuperFlexiDisk2.0 to EQM ( Embedded Quantum Memory .
) Paper , if stored in a cold dry place , is still readable after hundreds of years unless someone burns the place down .
So yeah , finding self-renewing and error-compensating storage media is a big one .
Lack of IT Competence - Face it , even good system admins forget about backups every now and then .
Home users never back up , which explains the long lines at the Geek Squad counter at Best Buy of nervous people clutching their precious 2 TB external storage tank that has every photo they ever took on it .
Until IT evolves a little and establishes archival standards that are n't some storage vendor 's flavor of the week , we 'll always have the " all data lost " kind of system failure .
Screen technology still sucks .
- There 's a reason optometrists invented the term " computer glasses .
" We 're a long way from flickering CRTs , but even the best LCD will ruin your eyes staring at the backlight for 8 hours a day .
A lot of people either ca n't or do n't want to stare at the monitor to read long-form stuff .
The Kindle screen is a good start ( no backlight , ) but the text can be fuzzy compared to a 1200 dpi printout .
" Important " stuff still gets printed .
- Anything you need to keep ( citizenship records , real estate deeds , tax information , etc .
) gets printed out for the simple reason that it would be a huge pain to try replacing it .
Here 's a really good example - I just changed jobs a few months ago , and my employer has switched to electronic paystubs .
My access to all that information is now gone .
If I want my paystubs , I have to call the HR department , they 'd have to print out each one and mail it to me.I 'd say given one more generation and some major improvements , we could get rid of most printed documents .
Until then , HP is still going to rake in the bucks on printers and toner .
We already have way less paper floating around - the legal and medical professions are the only ones still " innovating " in the paper filing arena .
Electronic bank statements , loan payments , and all that stuff means a whole lot less paper being mailed from place to place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of people are saying that human nature is the problem, but I think it's that combined with technological limitations.First, the human nature factor is getting to be less and less of an issue.
Younger people in the workforce don't seem to care about permanent records not being printed, and the number of filing cabinets in most offices has gone way down.
The human "need" for having a piece of paper in-hand has decreased, but people are (understandably) worried about some of the technology related issues: Archival and Storage - Even the most staunch advocate of paperless recordkeeping understands that digital formats come and go.
Just try to find a way to read data off 8" or even 5.25" floppies these days.
And even if you get the files off, good luck finding the software that created them.
Open file formats are a good remedy to the first problem, and I think their adoption is going to drive a lot of archiving projects.
However, someone has to remember to turn over the media every n years (I forget how long CD-ROMs are supposed to be good for, but to keep something for &gt;100 years, you need to convert it from CD-ROM to BluRay to GreenRay+ to SuperFlexiDisk2.0 to EQM (Embedded Quantum Memory.
) Paper, if stored in a cold dry place, is still readable after hundreds of years unless someone burns the place down.
So yeah, finding self-renewing and error-compensating storage media is a big one.
Lack of IT Competence - Face it, even good system admins forget about backups every now and then.
Home users never back up, which explains the long lines at the Geek Squad counter at Best Buy of nervous people clutching their precious 2 TB external storage tank that has every photo they ever took on it.
Until IT evolves a little and establishes archival standards that aren't some storage vendor's flavor of the week, we'll always have the "all data lost" kind of system failure.
Screen technology still sucks.
- There's a reason optometrists invented the term "computer glasses.
" We're a long way from flickering CRTs, but even the best LCD will ruin your eyes staring at the backlight for 8 hours a day.
A lot of people either can't or don't want to stare at the monitor to read long-form stuff.
The Kindle screen is a good start (no backlight,) but the text can be fuzzy compared to a 1200 dpi printout.
"Important" stuff still gets printed.
- Anything you need to keep (citizenship records, real estate deeds, tax information, etc.
) gets printed out for the simple reason that it would be a huge pain to try replacing it.
Here's a really good example - I just changed jobs a few months ago, and my employer has switched to electronic paystubs.
My access to all that information is now gone.
If I want my paystubs, I have to call the HR department, they'd have to print out each one and mail it to me.I'd say given one more generation and some major improvements, we could get rid of most printed documents.
Until then, HP is still going to rake in the bucks on printers and toner.
We already have way less paper floating around - the legal and medical professions are the only ones still "innovating" in the paper filing arena.
Electronic bank statements, loan payments, and all that stuff means a whole lot less paper being mailed from place to place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560292</id>
	<title>Old People.</title>
	<author>Killshot</author>
	<datestamp>1269166800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where I work the biggest holdup is that the company is run by old people who are incapable of understanding technology.  <b>Every email must be printed and filed multiple times. (one file for the recipient, one file for the sender, more files if there are CC's)  and every website of our customers and competitors is printed in completion and filed.</b>  Yes, we actually do this.<br>
So, we have two systems.  One that is mostly paperless so that those of us working can quickly access information.  The other system relies on a warehouse for storing documents (mostly printed emails and webpages) and a whole staff of people who only file and retrieve them.<br>
We currently print and file over 200,000 sheets of paper annually.<br>
<br>
We are a small company with 20 employees, but 1/3rd of our costs comes from moving and storing paper to satisfy the people in charge.<br>
Even the most simple tasks require moving paper around.  Let's say a sales lead comes in through our website.  Management prints several copies of the email, and then has it delivered to sales.  Sales types out a reply, and before sending it, prints a copy and then it is delivered back to management where it is approved, and then a message sent back to sales on any changes and finally the printed communications are filed.  Eliminating any of these steps is "eliminating the paper trail" and any digital alternative does not work because it eliminates paper<br> <br>
As the "IT guy" I have tried everything to get them to stop using so much paper.  Even staging a fake fire, to try and scare them into not relying on paper for storing all their information. (Failed, they started sending copies of more important documents to different locations to minimize risk.)<br>
Needless to say, we are losing money and I don't expect to have this job for much longer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where I work the biggest holdup is that the company is run by old people who are incapable of understanding technology .
Every email must be printed and filed multiple times .
( one file for the recipient , one file for the sender , more files if there are CC 's ) and every website of our customers and competitors is printed in completion and filed .
Yes , we actually do this .
So , we have two systems .
One that is mostly paperless so that those of us working can quickly access information .
The other system relies on a warehouse for storing documents ( mostly printed emails and webpages ) and a whole staff of people who only file and retrieve them .
We currently print and file over 200,000 sheets of paper annually .
We are a small company with 20 employees , but 1/3rd of our costs comes from moving and storing paper to satisfy the people in charge .
Even the most simple tasks require moving paper around .
Let 's say a sales lead comes in through our website .
Management prints several copies of the email , and then has it delivered to sales .
Sales types out a reply , and before sending it , prints a copy and then it is delivered back to management where it is approved , and then a message sent back to sales on any changes and finally the printed communications are filed .
Eliminating any of these steps is " eliminating the paper trail " and any digital alternative does not work because it eliminates paper As the " IT guy " I have tried everything to get them to stop using so much paper .
Even staging a fake fire , to try and scare them into not relying on paper for storing all their information .
( Failed , they started sending copies of more important documents to different locations to minimize risk .
) Needless to say , we are losing money and I do n't expect to have this job for much longer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where I work the biggest holdup is that the company is run by old people who are incapable of understanding technology.
Every email must be printed and filed multiple times.
(one file for the recipient, one file for the sender, more files if there are CC's)  and every website of our customers and competitors is printed in completion and filed.
Yes, we actually do this.
So, we have two systems.
One that is mostly paperless so that those of us working can quickly access information.
The other system relies on a warehouse for storing documents (mostly printed emails and webpages) and a whole staff of people who only file and retrieve them.
We currently print and file over 200,000 sheets of paper annually.
We are a small company with 20 employees, but 1/3rd of our costs comes from moving and storing paper to satisfy the people in charge.
Even the most simple tasks require moving paper around.
Let's say a sales lead comes in through our website.
Management prints several copies of the email, and then has it delivered to sales.
Sales types out a reply, and before sending it, prints a copy and then it is delivered back to management where it is approved, and then a message sent back to sales on any changes and finally the printed communications are filed.
Eliminating any of these steps is "eliminating the paper trail" and any digital alternative does not work because it eliminates paper 
As the "IT guy" I have tried everything to get them to stop using so much paper.
Even staging a fake fire, to try and scare them into not relying on paper for storing all their information.
(Failed, they started sending copies of more important documents to different locations to minimize risk.
)
Needless to say, we are losing money and I don't expect to have this job for much longer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564854</id>
	<title>Re:Tablet + OneNote = what you need.</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1269255060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only word of caution to teachers is if you are copying and pasting something - give your students time to recopy it in their notes.</p></div><p>You're teaching Mathematics, not note-taking, right?</p><p>Why not just say at the outset of the class something to the effect of "I'll be saving the notes I'm going through at $LOCATION where you can all download them when we're done, so you don't need to take notes"?</p><p>I've heard that writing things down helps you remember them, because it lets the brain... well, I didn't hear that part because I was busy writing things down to help myself remember them.  So maybe you-the-student want to just look, listen and <b>think</b>, and skip the writing because the nice 'fessor has already done it for you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only word of caution to teachers is if you are copying and pasting something - give your students time to recopy it in their notes.You 're teaching Mathematics , not note-taking , right ? Why not just say at the outset of the class something to the effect of " I 'll be saving the notes I 'm going through at $ LOCATION where you can all download them when we 're done , so you do n't need to take notes " ? I 've heard that writing things down helps you remember them , because it lets the brain... well , I did n't hear that part because I was busy writing things down to help myself remember them .
So maybe you-the-student want to just look , listen and think , and skip the writing because the nice 'fessor has already done it for you : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only word of caution to teachers is if you are copying and pasting something - give your students time to recopy it in their notes.You're teaching Mathematics, not note-taking, right?Why not just say at the outset of the class something to the effect of "I'll be saving the notes I'm going through at $LOCATION where you can all download them when we're done, so you don't need to take notes"?I've heard that writing things down helps you remember them, because it lets the brain... well, I didn't hear that part because I was busy writing things down to help myself remember them.
So maybe you-the-student want to just look, listen and think, and skip the writing because the nice 'fessor has already done it for you :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561148</id>
	<title>Simple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269172440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People who make a living doing nothing but shuffling papers all around.  Those sorts of people don't know s**t about computers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People who make a living doing nothing but shuffling papers all around .
Those sorts of people do n't know s * * t about computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People who make a living doing nothing but shuffling papers all around.
Those sorts of people don't know s**t about computers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564080</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>sl149q</author>
	<datestamp>1269198360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Your first paragraph is dead on, with a print out I can pass a doc around the room and each person marks it up and by the time it gets back to me it's a different document, With Email I get 10 different documents.</p><p>I guess that works well when your 10 people work in the same office. Not quite so well when they work in multiple countries in four or five different continents. Then even something as simple as GoogleDocs and a conference call can get it done just about as fast as running around the office.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Your first paragraph is dead on , with a print out I can pass a doc around the room and each person marks it up and by the time it gets back to me it 's a different document , With Email I get 10 different documents.I guess that works well when your 10 people work in the same office .
Not quite so well when they work in multiple countries in four or five different continents .
Then even something as simple as GoogleDocs and a conference call can get it done just about as fast as running around the office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Your first paragraph is dead on, with a print out I can pass a doc around the room and each person marks it up and by the time it gets back to me it's a different document, With Email I get 10 different documents.I guess that works well when your 10 people work in the same office.
Not quite so well when they work in multiple countries in four or five different continents.
Then even something as simple as GoogleDocs and a conference call can get it done just about as fast as running around the office.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559438</id>
	<title>The Government?</title>
	<author>jduhls</author>
	<datestamp>1269204300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>(see subject)</htmltext>
<tokenext>( see subject )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(see subject)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560246</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269166500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The bookkeeping end of a business alone makes your keep paper copies of invoices, bills, receipts, journal rolls, deposit slips and more. Your computer records are there for quick reference. If you get audited they aren't going to give two shits about your accounting software, they're going to want every last piece of paper to back up your claims.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The bookkeeping end of a business alone makes your keep paper copies of invoices , bills , receipts , journal rolls , deposit slips and more .
Your computer records are there for quick reference .
If you get audited they are n't going to give two shits about your accounting software , they 're going to want every last piece of paper to back up your claims .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bookkeeping end of a business alone makes your keep paper copies of invoices, bills, receipts, journal rolls, deposit slips and more.
Your computer records are there for quick reference.
If you get audited they aren't going to give two shits about your accounting software, they're going to want every last piece of paper to back up your claims.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559348</id>
	<title>What is that thing paper you are talking about?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269203640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wondering.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wondering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wondering.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561282</id>
	<title>What's holding it back?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269173580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SHITTY ASS IMPLEMENTATIONS OF DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.</p><p>You know, things like http://www.global360.com Case manager.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SHITTY ASS IMPLEMENTATIONS OF DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.You know , things like http : //www.global360.com Case manager .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SHITTY ASS IMPLEMENTATIONS OF DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.You know, things like http://www.global360.com Case manager.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564318</id>
	<title>Re:Drawing</title>
	<author>gargeug</author>
	<datestamp>1269288780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Absolutely. When you are thinking, you just need something quick to get it out so you A) can run with it...and B) have it for future reference. Until the electronic world can come up with such a disposable, permanent solution; there is no equivalent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely .
When you are thinking , you just need something quick to get it out so you A ) can run with it...and B ) have it for future reference .
Until the electronic world can come up with such a disposable , permanent solution ; there is no equivalent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely.
When you are thinking, you just need something quick to get it out so you A) can run with it...and B) have it for future reference.
Until the electronic world can come up with such a disposable, permanent solution; there is no equivalent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560744</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>gilgongo</author>
	<datestamp>1269169920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen to that! I die inside every single time I have to contract with an outside supplier. I swear it must take me at least two hours just to trudge around the office, get the feggin' signatures on the paperwork, scan them, splice the scans into the documents and then send email out to the (usually clueless) supplier with instructions to do the same. Cross fingers and hope they come back OK.</p><p>The alternative is to do it my snail mail. Oh yeah - that's really snappy when I'm in London, the CEO is in Dallas and the contractor is in Hong Kong. Three weeks later and we might be able to do business...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen to that !
I die inside every single time I have to contract with an outside supplier .
I swear it must take me at least two hours just to trudge around the office , get the feggin ' signatures on the paperwork , scan them , splice the scans into the documents and then send email out to the ( usually clueless ) supplier with instructions to do the same .
Cross fingers and hope they come back OK.The alternative is to do it my snail mail .
Oh yeah - that 's really snappy when I 'm in London , the CEO is in Dallas and the contractor is in Hong Kong .
Three weeks later and we might be able to do business.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen to that!
I die inside every single time I have to contract with an outside supplier.
I swear it must take me at least two hours just to trudge around the office, get the feggin' signatures on the paperwork, scan them, splice the scans into the documents and then send email out to the (usually clueless) supplier with instructions to do the same.
Cross fingers and hope they come back OK.The alternative is to do it my snail mail.
Oh yeah - that's really snappy when I'm in London, the CEO is in Dallas and the contractor is in Hong Kong.
Three weeks later and we might be able to do business...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559968</id>
	<title>Re:My office is paperless for years</title>
	<author>Drethon</author>
	<datestamp>1269164700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can agree at least partially with this one.  I've got a bunch of screens on my home machine which helps a lot with the viewing multiple pages issue.  I pretty much only print out to bring stuff to college...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can agree at least partially with this one .
I 've got a bunch of screens on my home machine which helps a lot with the viewing multiple pages issue .
I pretty much only print out to bring stuff to college.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can agree at least partially with this one.
I've got a bunch of screens on my home machine which helps a lot with the viewing multiple pages issue.
I pretty much only print out to bring stuff to college...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561374</id>
	<title>Re:Word Processors are holding us back...</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1269174780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Word docs are not Web pages. In our situation, any word doc available on a web server cannot be displayed in a web browser. Instead, you have to download the doc and then open it in Word.</p></div><p>I'm not a big fan of word processors, and I generally keep everything in plaintext/HTML/PDF, but that item is simply incorrect, for one reason: Google Docs. You can use the service to open any<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.pdf/.doc/.ppt/.whatever file on the internet, and there are even <a href="https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/nnbmlagghjjcbdhgmkedmbmedengocbn" title="google.com">browser extensions</a> [google.com] that make it into a one click process.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Word docs are not Web pages .
In our situation , any word doc available on a web server can not be displayed in a web browser .
Instead , you have to download the doc and then open it in Word.I 'm not a big fan of word processors , and I generally keep everything in plaintext/HTML/PDF , but that item is simply incorrect , for one reason : Google Docs .
You can use the service to open any .pdf/.doc/.ppt/.whatever file on the internet , and there are even browser extensions [ google.com ] that make it into a one click process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Word docs are not Web pages.
In our situation, any word doc available on a web server cannot be displayed in a web browser.
Instead, you have to download the doc and then open it in Word.I'm not a big fan of word processors, and I generally keep everything in plaintext/HTML/PDF, but that item is simply incorrect, for one reason: Google Docs.
You can use the service to open any .pdf/.doc/.ppt/.whatever file on the internet, and there are even browser extensions [google.com] that make it into a one click process.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562260</id>
	<title>Memory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269180960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use paper for memory.  I take notes on a computer but for exam, tests, or speeches, I write out the ideas.  My brain soaks in the ideas well when I can spatially separate them, highlighting text and whatnot.</p><p>I know a computer can do this, but I feel it's still missing something.  Maybe it's just something with the feel of a pen writing on paper.  Who knows.  Anyways, my $0.02.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use paper for memory .
I take notes on a computer but for exam , tests , or speeches , I write out the ideas .
My brain soaks in the ideas well when I can spatially separate them , highlighting text and whatnot.I know a computer can do this , but I feel it 's still missing something .
Maybe it 's just something with the feel of a pen writing on paper .
Who knows .
Anyways , my $ 0.02 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use paper for memory.
I take notes on a computer but for exam, tests, or speeches, I write out the ideas.
My brain soaks in the ideas well when I can spatially separate them, highlighting text and whatnot.I know a computer can do this, but I feel it's still missing something.
Maybe it's just something with the feel of a pen writing on paper.
Who knows.
Anyways, my $0.02.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559502</id>
	<title>Better E-readers</title>
	<author>Kreela</author>
	<datestamp>1269204660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find myself printing out less since I got an e-reader, but it's still just for certain documents. Temporary stuff, mostly. If I could doodle and use colour that might cut it down some more. I don't think screen size makes a lot of difference for me, but it might for some people.

You can't pass round electronic documents as easily, but what if someone built an e-reader that allowed you to dock with other readers and transfer files between them? That would change things (provided everyone in the office has compatible machines).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find myself printing out less since I got an e-reader , but it 's still just for certain documents .
Temporary stuff , mostly .
If I could doodle and use colour that might cut it down some more .
I do n't think screen size makes a lot of difference for me , but it might for some people .
You ca n't pass round electronic documents as easily , but what if someone built an e-reader that allowed you to dock with other readers and transfer files between them ?
That would change things ( provided everyone in the office has compatible machines ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find myself printing out less since I got an e-reader, but it's still just for certain documents.
Temporary stuff, mostly.
If I could doodle and use colour that might cut it down some more.
I don't think screen size makes a lot of difference for me, but it might for some people.
You can't pass round electronic documents as easily, but what if someone built an e-reader that allowed you to dock with other readers and transfer files between them?
That would change things (provided everyone in the office has compatible machines).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560436</id>
	<title>I actually have the answer !! no BS !!</title>
	<author>cinnamon colbert</author>
	<datestamp>1269167640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>its the screen
screns are way way behind paper in usability
just to mention one huge problem: most writing is portrait (short end of page up) and most screens are landscape.
screens are way slow; you can flip thru a dozen pages and find stuff, and compare two or 3 pages way easier on paper
you can bring paper with you to a mtg, or lunch or whatever
its easy to doodle on paper, if that helps you focus your thoughts</htmltext>
<tokenext>its the screen screns are way way behind paper in usability just to mention one huge problem : most writing is portrait ( short end of page up ) and most screens are landscape .
screens are way slow ; you can flip thru a dozen pages and find stuff , and compare two or 3 pages way easier on paper you can bring paper with you to a mtg , or lunch or whatever its easy to doodle on paper , if that helps you focus your thoughts</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its the screen
screns are way way behind paper in usability
just to mention one huge problem: most writing is portrait (short end of page up) and most screens are landscape.
screens are way slow; you can flip thru a dozen pages and find stuff, and compare two or 3 pages way easier on paper
you can bring paper with you to a mtg, or lunch or whatever
its easy to doodle on paper, if that helps you focus your thoughts</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561648</id>
	<title>Re:Resistance Of Change</title>
	<author>Geekbot</author>
	<datestamp>1269176760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure your post was funny. It seems very apropos. Outlook is a life saver for me. I have 4 bosses at my local site and at least 3 sort-of bosses at the central location that have new jobs for me almost every day, many of them conflicting. I then have about 40 people I work with, of which, about 25\% bring me a job each day. Without Outlook I would really be lost. No, paper was not enough because I had too many jobs and appointments coming to me out of order... I tried it. With Outlook I have multiple calendars for different types of scheduling information I'll need to look at. And I can put all those calendars together when needed. I get pop-up reminders at a time of my choosing and I can see when I have appointments overlapping. I have my notes associated with my appointments. And I can invite co-workers to the appointments they make with me (they give me paper notes) so that they don't forget either. It's close to perfect.</p><p>I do need to use a special database I made to track smaller jobs that aren't really applicable to a calendar. Tasks just wasn't full featured enough for me. It was great but I needed something closer to a help desk ticket system.</p><p>Unfortunately, several times a year my bosses ask me for reports, the same one reports for each boss. If I avoid paper by emailing the reports they all just print them out on desktop printers instead of on the more economical copiers. So now I just print them out all hole punched and throw them in a binder. It's wasting paper but that's not my call. You can't beat the user. Not when he's your boss anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure your post was funny .
It seems very apropos .
Outlook is a life saver for me .
I have 4 bosses at my local site and at least 3 sort-of bosses at the central location that have new jobs for me almost every day , many of them conflicting .
I then have about 40 people I work with , of which , about 25 \ % bring me a job each day .
Without Outlook I would really be lost .
No , paper was not enough because I had too many jobs and appointments coming to me out of order... I tried it .
With Outlook I have multiple calendars for different types of scheduling information I 'll need to look at .
And I can put all those calendars together when needed .
I get pop-up reminders at a time of my choosing and I can see when I have appointments overlapping .
I have my notes associated with my appointments .
And I can invite co-workers to the appointments they make with me ( they give me paper notes ) so that they do n't forget either .
It 's close to perfect.I do need to use a special database I made to track smaller jobs that are n't really applicable to a calendar .
Tasks just was n't full featured enough for me .
It was great but I needed something closer to a help desk ticket system.Unfortunately , several times a year my bosses ask me for reports , the same one reports for each boss .
If I avoid paper by emailing the reports they all just print them out on desktop printers instead of on the more economical copiers .
So now I just print them out all hole punched and throw them in a binder .
It 's wasting paper but that 's not my call .
You ca n't beat the user .
Not when he 's your boss anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure your post was funny.
It seems very apropos.
Outlook is a life saver for me.
I have 4 bosses at my local site and at least 3 sort-of bosses at the central location that have new jobs for me almost every day, many of them conflicting.
I then have about 40 people I work with, of which, about 25\% bring me a job each day.
Without Outlook I would really be lost.
No, paper was not enough because I had too many jobs and appointments coming to me out of order... I tried it.
With Outlook I have multiple calendars for different types of scheduling information I'll need to look at.
And I can put all those calendars together when needed.
I get pop-up reminders at a time of my choosing and I can see when I have appointments overlapping.
I have my notes associated with my appointments.
And I can invite co-workers to the appointments they make with me (they give me paper notes) so that they don't forget either.
It's close to perfect.I do need to use a special database I made to track smaller jobs that aren't really applicable to a calendar.
Tasks just wasn't full featured enough for me.
It was great but I needed something closer to a help desk ticket system.Unfortunately, several times a year my bosses ask me for reports, the same one reports for each boss.
If I avoid paper by emailing the reports they all just print them out on desktop printers instead of on the more economical copiers.
So now I just print them out all hole punched and throw them in a binder.
It's wasting paper but that's not my call.
You can't beat the user.
Not when he's your boss anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559714</id>
	<title>Re:Display size</title>
	<author>pla</author>
	<datestamp>1269163020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>So, in short, the paperless office is waiting on bigger displays.</i> <br>
<br>
For <i>most</i> of the reasons I use paper, an 8.5x11in 300dpi "tablet" (with a battery life long enough not to annoy
me) would work just wonderfully.<br>
<br>
Even then, though, I would still continue to leave "sticky" notes to myself on paper.  For example, one of my favorite
tricks made possible by nice thin LCD panels involves taking an index card, making two folds in it, and <i>BAM</i>,
instant persistent note that sits neatly in the top "margin" of my screen.  And best of all, it has four sides (six,
actually, but using the middle part misses the point) I can use to recycle it.<br>
<br>
When I can do that without using paper and for a yearly expense of under $0.49, we can talk.<br>
<br>
<br>
Now, that said, it <b>does</b> very much annoy me when people explicitly print out a document so I can have a hardcopy.  Just
email me the damned thing and save a forest.  This seems like a generational thing, IMO - Younger people just want the PDF,
with all its glorious searchability, while older ones complain about things like font sizes and the "eye strain" of an
illuminated background.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , in short , the paperless office is waiting on bigger displays .
For most of the reasons I use paper , an 8.5x11in 300dpi " tablet " ( with a battery life long enough not to annoy me ) would work just wonderfully .
Even then , though , I would still continue to leave " sticky " notes to myself on paper .
For example , one of my favorite tricks made possible by nice thin LCD panels involves taking an index card , making two folds in it , and BAM , instant persistent note that sits neatly in the top " margin " of my screen .
And best of all , it has four sides ( six , actually , but using the middle part misses the point ) I can use to recycle it .
When I can do that without using paper and for a yearly expense of under $ 0.49 , we can talk .
Now , that said , it does very much annoy me when people explicitly print out a document so I can have a hardcopy .
Just email me the damned thing and save a forest .
This seems like a generational thing , IMO - Younger people just want the PDF , with all its glorious searchability , while older ones complain about things like font sizes and the " eye strain " of an illuminated background .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, in short, the paperless office is waiting on bigger displays.
For most of the reasons I use paper, an 8.5x11in 300dpi "tablet" (with a battery life long enough not to annoy
me) would work just wonderfully.
Even then, though, I would still continue to leave "sticky" notes to myself on paper.
For example, one of my favorite
tricks made possible by nice thin LCD panels involves taking an index card, making two folds in it, and BAM,
instant persistent note that sits neatly in the top "margin" of my screen.
And best of all, it has four sides (six,
actually, but using the middle part misses the point) I can use to recycle it.
When I can do that without using paper and for a yearly expense of under $0.49, we can talk.
Now, that said, it does very much annoy me when people explicitly print out a document so I can have a hardcopy.
Just
email me the damned thing and save a forest.
This seems like a generational thing, IMO - Younger people just want the PDF,
with all its glorious searchability, while older ones complain about things like font sizes and the "eye strain" of an
illuminated background.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31588720</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>TheRedShirt</author>
	<datestamp>1269336000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Corporate Troll has a good point about the tactile nature of having a hard copy. That is something that I think will never go away. I am guilty of it too, but zuzulo has really hit the nail on the head. What are the legal ramifications of electronically signed documents?

Believe it or not<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,the US Military, in particular the Army is very nearly paperless now. All Field &amp; Technical Manuals and Army regulations are available in electronic format. Department of the Army and Defense forms are also digital as well. They may be filled out electronically and signed digitally with the Common Access Card (Smart Card to the rest of us) Even the "hard copy" personnel records are a thing of the past with vital paperwork electronically filed on military servers. For the Army, the digital signing is legally binding, but what about the Civilian realm?

Another problem is accessing the electronic documentation. In an office or shop environment, accessing electronic manuals is not that big of an issue. In a field environment, weather that be an on site call as a civilian, or forwardly deployed in the military, that is an issue. You simply cannot be tied down to a desktop. In some cases even a laptop or net book is a stretch, and not a feasible option. Weather you are an IT professional crawling around in access ducts and need to pull up a schematic or a Soldier in the heat of battle that needs to pull up the map of the battle space and/or the operation order, even a net book is not an option.

Users can create electronic forms in a variety of programs, or use those created for them, but what do you do with them? Fill them out at the office? Pull out a laptop or net book? I have created several electronic forms in order to streamline my work, but I am still forced to print them out in order to use them. I think that the release of the Slate format PC this year will start nailing the coffin shut on paper driven systems.

The Slate format has been panned by some critics as being a novelty, one that will have no real use. They said the dame about the Home Computer and the Cell Phone. IF done right, the Slate format has the potential to revolutionize the office space. Paper will never truly go the way of the dinosaur, but it will become the novelty, not the electronics that are replacing it.

The key factors that are inherent to making this a reality though, I think are:

1) A standard for digitally signing documents and the legal acceptance of them.
2) Slate PC's that are capable of producing legally accepted digitally signed documents, weather that be an "etch-a-sketch" signature capture, a Smart Card endorsement or fingerprint reader.
3) Slates that have negligible boot times, (SSD anyone?) batteries that allow for "all day operation" and durability. Durability I think is the key factor on this mark, as sleep states can to a degree remedy the boot time and battery life.

It has been stated that the price point on Slates will be in the neighborhood of about $500. If I can find a Slate that can meet all of my needs, I will happily pay twice that.
The next year of technology offerings will be very telling as to weather the paperless work space will come to fruition.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporate Troll has a good point about the tactile nature of having a hard copy .
That is something that I think will never go away .
I am guilty of it too , but zuzulo has really hit the nail on the head .
What are the legal ramifications of electronically signed documents ?
Believe it or not ,the US Military , in particular the Army is very nearly paperless now .
All Field &amp; Technical Manuals and Army regulations are available in electronic format .
Department of the Army and Defense forms are also digital as well .
They may be filled out electronically and signed digitally with the Common Access Card ( Smart Card to the rest of us ) Even the " hard copy " personnel records are a thing of the past with vital paperwork electronically filed on military servers .
For the Army , the digital signing is legally binding , but what about the Civilian realm ?
Another problem is accessing the electronic documentation .
In an office or shop environment , accessing electronic manuals is not that big of an issue .
In a field environment , weather that be an on site call as a civilian , or forwardly deployed in the military , that is an issue .
You simply can not be tied down to a desktop .
In some cases even a laptop or net book is a stretch , and not a feasible option .
Weather you are an IT professional crawling around in access ducts and need to pull up a schematic or a Soldier in the heat of battle that needs to pull up the map of the battle space and/or the operation order , even a net book is not an option .
Users can create electronic forms in a variety of programs , or use those created for them , but what do you do with them ?
Fill them out at the office ?
Pull out a laptop or net book ?
I have created several electronic forms in order to streamline my work , but I am still forced to print them out in order to use them .
I think that the release of the Slate format PC this year will start nailing the coffin shut on paper driven systems .
The Slate format has been panned by some critics as being a novelty , one that will have no real use .
They said the dame about the Home Computer and the Cell Phone .
IF done right , the Slate format has the potential to revolutionize the office space .
Paper will never truly go the way of the dinosaur , but it will become the novelty , not the electronics that are replacing it .
The key factors that are inherent to making this a reality though , I think are : 1 ) A standard for digitally signing documents and the legal acceptance of them .
2 ) Slate PC 's that are capable of producing legally accepted digitally signed documents , weather that be an " etch-a-sketch " signature capture , a Smart Card endorsement or fingerprint reader .
3 ) Slates that have negligible boot times , ( SSD anyone ?
) batteries that allow for " all day operation " and durability .
Durability I think is the key factor on this mark , as sleep states can to a degree remedy the boot time and battery life .
It has been stated that the price point on Slates will be in the neighborhood of about $ 500 .
If I can find a Slate that can meet all of my needs , I will happily pay twice that .
The next year of technology offerings will be very telling as to weather the paperless work space will come to fruition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporate Troll has a good point about the tactile nature of having a hard copy.
That is something that I think will never go away.
I am guilty of it too, but zuzulo has really hit the nail on the head.
What are the legal ramifications of electronically signed documents?
Believe it or not ,the US Military, in particular the Army is very nearly paperless now.
All Field &amp; Technical Manuals and Army regulations are available in electronic format.
Department of the Army and Defense forms are also digital as well.
They may be filled out electronically and signed digitally with the Common Access Card (Smart Card to the rest of us) Even the "hard copy" personnel records are a thing of the past with vital paperwork electronically filed on military servers.
For the Army, the digital signing is legally binding, but what about the Civilian realm?
Another problem is accessing the electronic documentation.
In an office or shop environment, accessing electronic manuals is not that big of an issue.
In a field environment, weather that be an on site call as a civilian, or forwardly deployed in the military, that is an issue.
You simply cannot be tied down to a desktop.
In some cases even a laptop or net book is a stretch, and not a feasible option.
Weather you are an IT professional crawling around in access ducts and need to pull up a schematic or a Soldier in the heat of battle that needs to pull up the map of the battle space and/or the operation order, even a net book is not an option.
Users can create electronic forms in a variety of programs, or use those created for them, but what do you do with them?
Fill them out at the office?
Pull out a laptop or net book?
I have created several electronic forms in order to streamline my work, but I am still forced to print them out in order to use them.
I think that the release of the Slate format PC this year will start nailing the coffin shut on paper driven systems.
The Slate format has been panned by some critics as being a novelty, one that will have no real use.
They said the dame about the Home Computer and the Cell Phone.
IF done right, the Slate format has the potential to revolutionize the office space.
Paper will never truly go the way of the dinosaur, but it will become the novelty, not the electronics that are replacing it.
The key factors that are inherent to making this a reality though, I think are:

1) A standard for digitally signing documents and the legal acceptance of them.
2) Slate PC's that are capable of producing legally accepted digitally signed documents, weather that be an "etch-a-sketch" signature capture, a Smart Card endorsement or fingerprint reader.
3) Slates that have negligible boot times, (SSD anyone?
) batteries that allow for "all day operation" and durability.
Durability I think is the key factor on this mark, as sleep states can to a degree remedy the boot time and battery life.
It has been stated that the price point on Slates will be in the neighborhood of about $500.
If I can find a Slate that can meet all of my needs, I will happily pay twice that.
The next year of technology offerings will be very telling as to weather the paperless work space will come to fruition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560992</id>
	<title>except for the options...</title>
	<author>Eth1csGrad1ent</author>
	<datestamp>1269171360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Instead of paper you could use water, hand (just use your other hand for eating) or cloth in the toilet. Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.</p></div><p>All of these are valid options, until you give people a choice.  From that point its paper all the way.<br>Just as you COULD travel from New York to Los Angeles via horse and cart - but most people choose not to.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of paper you could use water , hand ( just use your other hand for eating ) or cloth in the toilet .
Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.All of these are valid options , until you give people a choice .
From that point its paper all the way.Just as you COULD travel from New York to Los Angeles via horse and cart - but most people choose not to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of paper you could use water, hand (just use your other hand for eating) or cloth in the toilet.
Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.All of these are valid options, until you give people a choice.
From that point its paper all the way.Just as you COULD travel from New York to Los Angeles via horse and cart - but most people choose not to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559738</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>toastar</author>
	<datestamp>1269163200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Humans...  We like to have a piece of paper in our hands, we can easily hand it to a coworker, we can scribble on it to take notes.  I know it sounds oldskool, but for many tasks, a piece of paper is just superior.  Sure, most of it is for temporary use, but paper isn't going anywhere.  For many people reading from screen just isn't anywhere as comfortable as reading from paper.  (That's why we still buy real books!)</p><p>People who bought the "paperless office" fad years ago were living in a dreamland.</p><p>Also, one thing to keep in mind.  I have worked on large scale "scan documents from archives and the commit to big-ass proprietary content management systems".  The conversion was extremely expensive, and the maintenance even more so.  After all, you now needed expensive content manager Consultants, and competent DBAs (who have to be on call).  For the paper version, you just needed one or two archivars.  Just having tons and tons of paper sitting in a warehouse was was much cheaper, I heard later.  These were Police documents, and they scanned in B&amp;W... Photos were as such became unusable... I sure hope they'll keep the originals.  I wonder who ever in his right mind approved that project.</p></div><p>Your first paragraph is dead on, with a print out I can pass a doc around the room and each person marks it up and by the time it gets back to me it's a different document, With Email I get 10 different documents.</p><p>your CMS Consultant should of got fired for scanning those in an unacceptable format though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans... We like to have a piece of paper in our hands , we can easily hand it to a coworker , we can scribble on it to take notes .
I know it sounds oldskool , but for many tasks , a piece of paper is just superior .
Sure , most of it is for temporary use , but paper is n't going anywhere .
For many people reading from screen just is n't anywhere as comfortable as reading from paper .
( That 's why we still buy real books !
) People who bought the " paperless office " fad years ago were living in a dreamland.Also , one thing to keep in mind .
I have worked on large scale " scan documents from archives and the commit to big-ass proprietary content management systems " .
The conversion was extremely expensive , and the maintenance even more so .
After all , you now needed expensive content manager Consultants , and competent DBAs ( who have to be on call ) .
For the paper version , you just needed one or two archivars .
Just having tons and tons of paper sitting in a warehouse was was much cheaper , I heard later .
These were Police documents , and they scanned in B&amp;W... Photos were as such became unusable... I sure hope they 'll keep the originals .
I wonder who ever in his right mind approved that project.Your first paragraph is dead on , with a print out I can pass a doc around the room and each person marks it up and by the time it gets back to me it 's a different document , With Email I get 10 different documents.your CMS Consultant should of got fired for scanning those in an unacceptable format though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans...  We like to have a piece of paper in our hands, we can easily hand it to a coworker, we can scribble on it to take notes.
I know it sounds oldskool, but for many tasks, a piece of paper is just superior.
Sure, most of it is for temporary use, but paper isn't going anywhere.
For many people reading from screen just isn't anywhere as comfortable as reading from paper.
(That's why we still buy real books!
)People who bought the "paperless office" fad years ago were living in a dreamland.Also, one thing to keep in mind.
I have worked on large scale "scan documents from archives and the commit to big-ass proprietary content management systems".
The conversion was extremely expensive, and the maintenance even more so.
After all, you now needed expensive content manager Consultants, and competent DBAs (who have to be on call).
For the paper version, you just needed one or two archivars.
Just having tons and tons of paper sitting in a warehouse was was much cheaper, I heard later.
These were Police documents, and they scanned in B&amp;W... Photos were as such became unusable... I sure hope they'll keep the originals.
I wonder who ever in his right mind approved that project.Your first paragraph is dead on, with a print out I can pass a doc around the room and each person marks it up and by the time it gets back to me it's a different document, With Email I get 10 different documents.your CMS Consultant should of got fired for scanning those in an unacceptable format though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31569006</id>
	<title>Meetings.   It's all about meetings.</title>
	<author>cbreaker</author>
	<datestamp>1269274320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't use much paper.  Most people in IT don't use paper much.   You might print out a big diagram to hang on the wall for everyone to look at but almost everything is in electronic form.<br><br>Except for the meeting room.   In my current position I'm the one that hosts most meetings I attend.  I need to bring hand-outs for people, and I need to take notes.   While I could use a laptop to take notes - and sometimes I do - it's not the most practical tool and I feel as though it can interfere with the flow of a discussion.<br><br>So that's it - meetings.   You need notebooks and handouts.<br><br>Companies can greatly reduce the number of hand-outs at meetings if they include projectors in every room, however.   At my last contract, 100\% of the conference rooms had projectors.   You could set up your computer and walk through a powerpoint or just a word document for everyone to see and no paper needed.   You could even take notes right on the big screen and people can participate in that part too.    You still needed hand-outs sometimes but quite a bit less often.   (And, I ran Ubuntu on my notebook so it was fun when everyone gawked at Desktop Cube and Wobbly Windows.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't use much paper .
Most people in IT do n't use paper much .
You might print out a big diagram to hang on the wall for everyone to look at but almost everything is in electronic form.Except for the meeting room .
In my current position I 'm the one that hosts most meetings I attend .
I need to bring hand-outs for people , and I need to take notes .
While I could use a laptop to take notes - and sometimes I do - it 's not the most practical tool and I feel as though it can interfere with the flow of a discussion.So that 's it - meetings .
You need notebooks and handouts.Companies can greatly reduce the number of hand-outs at meetings if they include projectors in every room , however .
At my last contract , 100 \ % of the conference rooms had projectors .
You could set up your computer and walk through a powerpoint or just a word document for everyone to see and no paper needed .
You could even take notes right on the big screen and people can participate in that part too .
You still needed hand-outs sometimes but quite a bit less often .
( And , I ran Ubuntu on my notebook so it was fun when everyone gawked at Desktop Cube and Wobbly Windows .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't use much paper.
Most people in IT don't use paper much.
You might print out a big diagram to hang on the wall for everyone to look at but almost everything is in electronic form.Except for the meeting room.
In my current position I'm the one that hosts most meetings I attend.
I need to bring hand-outs for people, and I need to take notes.
While I could use a laptop to take notes - and sometimes I do - it's not the most practical tool and I feel as though it can interfere with the flow of a discussion.So that's it - meetings.
You need notebooks and handouts.Companies can greatly reduce the number of hand-outs at meetings if they include projectors in every room, however.
At my last contract, 100\% of the conference rooms had projectors.
You could set up your computer and walk through a powerpoint or just a word document for everyone to see and no paper needed.
You could even take notes right on the big screen and people can participate in that part too.
You still needed hand-outs sometimes but quite a bit less often.
(And, I ran Ubuntu on my notebook so it was fun when everyone gawked at Desktop Cube and Wobbly Windows.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31566584</id>
	<title>It comes down to the right tool for the right job</title>
	<author>Garwulf</author>
	<datestamp>1269268200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've noticed that there seems to be an either/or mentality when it comes to technology.  And this really is a false dichotomy.</p><p>When it comes down to it, what matters the most is utility, with personal preferences coming a distinct second.  Pen and paper in an office is a tool, just as the computer is.  The question ultimately becomes which is better for each task.</p><p>If you're dealing with lots of legal contracts, you're going to have paper files - same if you need to keep long term records, as the technological issues that might arise with a computer won't with a filing cabinet.  On the other hand, if you're dealing with customer support, where you need to be able to call up files while on a phone, a database is a lot better for the task than a filing cabinet.</p><p>There's an old saying: just because you can do a thing, it does not follow that you SHOULD do that thing.  The paperless office as an umbrella term falls under that phrase in a big way.  Yes, it is possible to do everything by computer.  That doesn't make it a good idea, though.  It's a lot better to use the best tool for each job, be it a computer or paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've noticed that there seems to be an either/or mentality when it comes to technology .
And this really is a false dichotomy.When it comes down to it , what matters the most is utility , with personal preferences coming a distinct second .
Pen and paper in an office is a tool , just as the computer is .
The question ultimately becomes which is better for each task.If you 're dealing with lots of legal contracts , you 're going to have paper files - same if you need to keep long term records , as the technological issues that might arise with a computer wo n't with a filing cabinet .
On the other hand , if you 're dealing with customer support , where you need to be able to call up files while on a phone , a database is a lot better for the task than a filing cabinet.There 's an old saying : just because you can do a thing , it does not follow that you SHOULD do that thing .
The paperless office as an umbrella term falls under that phrase in a big way .
Yes , it is possible to do everything by computer .
That does n't make it a good idea , though .
It 's a lot better to use the best tool for each job , be it a computer or paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've noticed that there seems to be an either/or mentality when it comes to technology.
And this really is a false dichotomy.When it comes down to it, what matters the most is utility, with personal preferences coming a distinct second.
Pen and paper in an office is a tool, just as the computer is.
The question ultimately becomes which is better for each task.If you're dealing with lots of legal contracts, you're going to have paper files - same if you need to keep long term records, as the technological issues that might arise with a computer won't with a filing cabinet.
On the other hand, if you're dealing with customer support, where you need to be able to call up files while on a phone, a database is a lot better for the task than a filing cabinet.There's an old saying: just because you can do a thing, it does not follow that you SHOULD do that thing.
The paperless office as an umbrella term falls under that phrase in a big way.
Yes, it is possible to do everything by computer.
That doesn't make it a good idea, though.
It's a lot better to use the best tool for each job, be it a computer or paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559340</id>
	<title>Standards?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269203580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of the paper in our office relates to invoice and billing, everyone wants everything on headed paper. It would be nice if there were a set of open standards for documents like this, with an acceptable way to easily digitally sign and verify documents for authenticity, and some kind of indexing tool to allow prompt searches.</p><p>Also like Drethon says, being able to print out a bunch of pages and spread them around is awesome, especially for hand outs at meetings, CVs when interviewing people, etc etc. Perhaps one of these super magic touch screen lcd tables that are in some labs at the moment could help with that one day<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</p><p>Also I just like writing things down on a notepad, rather than in to a computer!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of the paper in our office relates to invoice and billing , everyone wants everything on headed paper .
It would be nice if there were a set of open standards for documents like this , with an acceptable way to easily digitally sign and verify documents for authenticity , and some kind of indexing tool to allow prompt searches.Also like Drethon says , being able to print out a bunch of pages and spread them around is awesome , especially for hand outs at meetings , CVs when interviewing people , etc etc .
Perhaps one of these super magic touch screen lcd tables that are in some labs at the moment could help with that one day ..Also I just like writing things down on a notepad , rather than in to a computer !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of the paper in our office relates to invoice and billing, everyone wants everything on headed paper.
It would be nice if there were a set of open standards for documents like this, with an acceptable way to easily digitally sign and verify documents for authenticity, and some kind of indexing tool to allow prompt searches.Also like Drethon says, being able to print out a bunch of pages and spread them around is awesome, especially for hand outs at meetings, CVs when interviewing people, etc etc.
Perhaps one of these super magic touch screen lcd tables that are in some labs at the moment could help with that one day ..Also I just like writing things down on a notepad, rather than in to a computer!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</id>
	<title>Basically?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269202980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Humans...  We like to have a piece of paper in our hands, we can easily hand it to a coworker, we can scribble on it to take notes.  I know it sounds oldskool, but for many tasks, a piece of paper is just superior.  Sure, most of it is for temporary use, but paper isn't going anywhere.  For many people reading from screen just isn't anywhere as comfortable as reading from paper.  (That's why we still buy real books!)</p><p>People who bought the "paperless office" fad years ago were living in a dreamland.</p><p>Also, one thing to keep in mind.  I have worked on large scale "scan documents from archives and the commit to big-ass proprietary content management systems".  The conversion was extremely expensive, and the maintenance even more so.  After all, you now needed expensive content manager Consultants, and competent DBAs (who have to be on call).  For the paper version, you just needed one or two archivars.  Just having tons and tons of paper sitting in a warehouse was was much cheaper, I heard later.  These were Police documents, and they scanned in B&amp;W... Photos were as such became unusable... I sure hope they'll keep the originals.  I wonder who ever in his right mind approved that project.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans... We like to have a piece of paper in our hands , we can easily hand it to a coworker , we can scribble on it to take notes .
I know it sounds oldskool , but for many tasks , a piece of paper is just superior .
Sure , most of it is for temporary use , but paper is n't going anywhere .
For many people reading from screen just is n't anywhere as comfortable as reading from paper .
( That 's why we still buy real books !
) People who bought the " paperless office " fad years ago were living in a dreamland.Also , one thing to keep in mind .
I have worked on large scale " scan documents from archives and the commit to big-ass proprietary content management systems " .
The conversion was extremely expensive , and the maintenance even more so .
After all , you now needed expensive content manager Consultants , and competent DBAs ( who have to be on call ) .
For the paper version , you just needed one or two archivars .
Just having tons and tons of paper sitting in a warehouse was was much cheaper , I heard later .
These were Police documents , and they scanned in B&amp;W... Photos were as such became unusable... I sure hope they 'll keep the originals .
I wonder who ever in his right mind approved that project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans...  We like to have a piece of paper in our hands, we can easily hand it to a coworker, we can scribble on it to take notes.
I know it sounds oldskool, but for many tasks, a piece of paper is just superior.
Sure, most of it is for temporary use, but paper isn't going anywhere.
For many people reading from screen just isn't anywhere as comfortable as reading from paper.
(That's why we still buy real books!
)People who bought the "paperless office" fad years ago were living in a dreamland.Also, one thing to keep in mind.
I have worked on large scale "scan documents from archives and the commit to big-ass proprietary content management systems".
The conversion was extremely expensive, and the maintenance even more so.
After all, you now needed expensive content manager Consultants, and competent DBAs (who have to be on call).
For the paper version, you just needed one or two archivars.
Just having tons and tons of paper sitting in a warehouse was was much cheaper, I heard later.
These were Police documents, and they scanned in B&amp;W... Photos were as such became unusable... I sure hope they'll keep the originals.
I wonder who ever in his right mind approved that project.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559748</id>
	<title>Duh</title>
	<author>Fujisawa Sensei</author>
	<datestamp>1269163260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll go paperless when I get a CRT that supports 3 or 4 8 1/2x 11 documents at one time, at 8 1/2x 11 with 300+ dpi resolution, and lets me take notes on any document format, in any way I see fit, highlighter, drawing lines, whatever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll go paperless when I get a CRT that supports 3 or 4 8 1/2x 11 documents at one time , at 8 1/2x 11 with 300 + dpi resolution , and lets me take notes on any document format , in any way I see fit , highlighter , drawing lines , whatever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll go paperless when I get a CRT that supports 3 or 4 8 1/2x 11 documents at one time, at 8 1/2x 11 with 300+ dpi resolution, and lets me take notes on any document format, in any way I see fit, highlighter, drawing lines, whatever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559994</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>OzPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1269164880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet. Some things would be impractical..."

OK, it's not that old a saying, but it's valid in a number of ways.</p></div><p>You should travel through places like the middle east and like Turkey<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. the paperless toilet is a reality and is the main reason you don't touch food with your left hand or shake peoples left hands</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet .
Some things would be impractical... " OK , it 's not that old a saying , but it 's valid in a number of ways.You should travel through places like the middle east and like Turkey .. the paperless toilet is a reality and is the main reason you do n't touch food with your left hand or shake peoples left hands</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet.
Some things would be impractical..."

OK, it's not that old a saying, but it's valid in a number of ways.You should travel through places like the middle east and like Turkey .. the paperless toilet is a reality and is the main reason you don't touch food with your left hand or shake peoples left hands
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559980</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>basotl</author>
	<datestamp>1269164760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The military is actually spearheading this area. Currently we use a common access card to sign documents with a key.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The military is actually spearheading this area .
Currently we use a common access card to sign documents with a key .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The military is actually spearheading this area.
Currently we use a common access card to sign documents with a key.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560196</id>
	<title>Digital signatures</title>
	<author>egrinake</author>
	<datestamp>1269166140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I only deal with paper when I need to sign something - which usually means that I receive a PDF by email, print it out, sign the paper, scan it, and email the scan back. If we could only get a widely accepted system for digital signatures I wouldn't need to keep doing this ridiculous ritual, or deal with paper at all.</p><p>On the other hand, my handwriting looks like I'm a ten-year old, as I don't write anything by hand more than once or twice a month, and then it's just short notes. I'm going back to school next year, and the prospect of writing long texts by hand for exams etc. is really worrying me - the lack of efficient editing facilities and the slow pace of my writing is quite certain to have an adverse effect on the quality of my work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I only deal with paper when I need to sign something - which usually means that I receive a PDF by email , print it out , sign the paper , scan it , and email the scan back .
If we could only get a widely accepted system for digital signatures I would n't need to keep doing this ridiculous ritual , or deal with paper at all.On the other hand , my handwriting looks like I 'm a ten-year old , as I do n't write anything by hand more than once or twice a month , and then it 's just short notes .
I 'm going back to school next year , and the prospect of writing long texts by hand for exams etc .
is really worrying me - the lack of efficient editing facilities and the slow pace of my writing is quite certain to have an adverse effect on the quality of my work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I only deal with paper when I need to sign something - which usually means that I receive a PDF by email, print it out, sign the paper, scan it, and email the scan back.
If we could only get a widely accepted system for digital signatures I wouldn't need to keep doing this ridiculous ritual, or deal with paper at all.On the other hand, my handwriting looks like I'm a ten-year old, as I don't write anything by hand more than once or twice a month, and then it's just short notes.
I'm going back to school next year, and the prospect of writing long texts by hand for exams etc.
is really worrying me - the lack of efficient editing facilities and the slow pace of my writing is quite certain to have an adverse effect on the quality of my work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564790</id>
	<title>Re:Tablet + OneNote = what you need.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269253680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><br> <i>chalkboard</i> <br> <br>
Is this a politically correct blackboard or something ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>chalkboard Is this a politically correct blackboard or something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> chalkboard  
Is this a politically correct blackboard or something ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360</id>
	<title>Word Processors are holding us back...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269167160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IME, word processors (such as Word)  are the main impediment to the paperless office.  The general problems are: they're based on the 8.5 x 11" paper paradigm, they contain unstructured data, and they're too difficult to share, search, and otherwise organize electronically.  I use MS-Word at work, so my examples/complaints will be specific to Word.  The issues I have with Word in how it impedes a paperless office are:</p><ul>
<li>My monitor isn't 8.5 x 11 in size.  This is especially problematic on a 22" monitor, especially when monitors nowadays are much wider than they are tall.</li><li>Scrolling through a document is painful.  It unexpectedly jumps to the next page in page view mode.  If you view the document in draft mode, which scrolls smoothly, picture objects aren't displayed.</li><li>Margins in Word docs are painfully contrived.  They artificially limit how much text can appear on each line.  Margins are based on an 8.5" wide page, which leaves even more of my 22" monitor's real estate unused.  By comparison, an html based doc (aka web sites) will easily expand/contract to match your browser's window size.</li><li>Word docs are not Web pages.  In our situation, any word doc available on a web server cannot be displayed in a web browser.  Instead, you have to download the doc and then open it in Word.  Needless to say this is extremely clumsy, slow, and bookmark unfriendly.  Instead of being able to create a fast loading bookmark, folks tend to print out a paper copy of the document for convenience.  Since folks rely on downloaded or printed copies, updates to the source document on the website are very slow to propagate (meaning that folks continue to use the out of date copy.)</li><li>Word docs are slow and clumsy to version control and to diff.</li><li>It's easier to email a document around than it is to peer review a Word document using the built in change tracking or to use peer review software.  End result is several copies of a document floating around, and no good way to reconcile the copies.</li><li>Word docs are databases.  Unfortunately, the data in a Word doc is too unstructured and very difficult, if not impossible, to reliably enforce order on the data contained therein.  This also makes it difficult to search across documents.  This especially impacts engineering, requirements, and policy documents.  That kind of data would be better off in a real database and not "managed" in Word docs.</li><li>Word is bloated and slow to load.  A website page can load in a couple of seconds.  Word is slow to load to the point that it's often faster just to pick up the printout and read it instead.</li></ul><p>IMO, the paperless office isn't going to happen until Someone(tm) manages to replace the word processor with a database that looks and acts like a word processor.  Kind of like how everyone can use a fax machine (which acts like a telephone and copier) but those same folks balk at using a computer scanner and email over tcp/ip even though the fax machine is simply a low quality scanner that uses an inflexible, low speed modem instead of a tcp/ip network connection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IME , word processors ( such as Word ) are the main impediment to the paperless office .
The general problems are : they 're based on the 8.5 x 11 " paper paradigm , they contain unstructured data , and they 're too difficult to share , search , and otherwise organize electronically .
I use MS-Word at work , so my examples/complaints will be specific to Word .
The issues I have with Word in how it impedes a paperless office are : My monitor is n't 8.5 x 11 in size .
This is especially problematic on a 22 " monitor , especially when monitors nowadays are much wider than they are tall.Scrolling through a document is painful .
It unexpectedly jumps to the next page in page view mode .
If you view the document in draft mode , which scrolls smoothly , picture objects are n't displayed.Margins in Word docs are painfully contrived .
They artificially limit how much text can appear on each line .
Margins are based on an 8.5 " wide page , which leaves even more of my 22 " monitor 's real estate unused .
By comparison , an html based doc ( aka web sites ) will easily expand/contract to match your browser 's window size.Word docs are not Web pages .
In our situation , any word doc available on a web server can not be displayed in a web browser .
Instead , you have to download the doc and then open it in Word .
Needless to say this is extremely clumsy , slow , and bookmark unfriendly .
Instead of being able to create a fast loading bookmark , folks tend to print out a paper copy of the document for convenience .
Since folks rely on downloaded or printed copies , updates to the source document on the website are very slow to propagate ( meaning that folks continue to use the out of date copy .
) Word docs are slow and clumsy to version control and to diff.It 's easier to email a document around than it is to peer review a Word document using the built in change tracking or to use peer review software .
End result is several copies of a document floating around , and no good way to reconcile the copies.Word docs are databases .
Unfortunately , the data in a Word doc is too unstructured and very difficult , if not impossible , to reliably enforce order on the data contained therein .
This also makes it difficult to search across documents .
This especially impacts engineering , requirements , and policy documents .
That kind of data would be better off in a real database and not " managed " in Word docs.Word is bloated and slow to load .
A website page can load in a couple of seconds .
Word is slow to load to the point that it 's often faster just to pick up the printout and read it instead.IMO , the paperless office is n't going to happen until Someone ( tm ) manages to replace the word processor with a database that looks and acts like a word processor .
Kind of like how everyone can use a fax machine ( which acts like a telephone and copier ) but those same folks balk at using a computer scanner and email over tcp/ip even though the fax machine is simply a low quality scanner that uses an inflexible , low speed modem instead of a tcp/ip network connection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IME, word processors (such as Word)  are the main impediment to the paperless office.
The general problems are: they're based on the 8.5 x 11" paper paradigm, they contain unstructured data, and they're too difficult to share, search, and otherwise organize electronically.
I use MS-Word at work, so my examples/complaints will be specific to Word.
The issues I have with Word in how it impedes a paperless office are:
My monitor isn't 8.5 x 11 in size.
This is especially problematic on a 22" monitor, especially when monitors nowadays are much wider than they are tall.Scrolling through a document is painful.
It unexpectedly jumps to the next page in page view mode.
If you view the document in draft mode, which scrolls smoothly, picture objects aren't displayed.Margins in Word docs are painfully contrived.
They artificially limit how much text can appear on each line.
Margins are based on an 8.5" wide page, which leaves even more of my 22" monitor's real estate unused.
By comparison, an html based doc (aka web sites) will easily expand/contract to match your browser's window size.Word docs are not Web pages.
In our situation, any word doc available on a web server cannot be displayed in a web browser.
Instead, you have to download the doc and then open it in Word.
Needless to say this is extremely clumsy, slow, and bookmark unfriendly.
Instead of being able to create a fast loading bookmark, folks tend to print out a paper copy of the document for convenience.
Since folks rely on downloaded or printed copies, updates to the source document on the website are very slow to propagate (meaning that folks continue to use the out of date copy.
)Word docs are slow and clumsy to version control and to diff.It's easier to email a document around than it is to peer review a Word document using the built in change tracking or to use peer review software.
End result is several copies of a document floating around, and no good way to reconcile the copies.Word docs are databases.
Unfortunately, the data in a Word doc is too unstructured and very difficult, if not impossible, to reliably enforce order on the data contained therein.
This also makes it difficult to search across documents.
This especially impacts engineering, requirements, and policy documents.
That kind of data would be better off in a real database and not "managed" in Word docs.Word is bloated and slow to load.
A website page can load in a couple of seconds.
Word is slow to load to the point that it's often faster just to pick up the printout and read it instead.IMO, the paperless office isn't going to happen until Someone(tm) manages to replace the word processor with a database that looks and acts like a word processor.
Kind of like how everyone can use a fax machine (which acts like a telephone and copier) but those same folks balk at using a computer scanner and email over tcp/ip even though the fax machine is simply a low quality scanner that uses an inflexible, low speed modem instead of a tcp/ip network connection.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560690</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>harmonise</author>
	<datestamp>1269169560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you work in health care, at a law office, in insurance, in a financial institution or virtually anything else heavily regulated by the government, you must keep paper copies of most of your stuff. You just can't have a paperless office in those situations.</p></div></blockquote><p>Not true, at least for health care. I work for a large pharmaceutical company and we use electronic records for nearly everything, including electronic signatures. The document management system has to be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title\_21\_CFR\_Part\_11" title="wikipedia.org">Title 21 CFR Part 11</a> [wikipedia.org] compliant. It's much better than the days of having huge printed docs circulate between offices (sometimes in multiple countries) to get reviewed and signed. The best part is that the documents are fully searchable, so it's much easier to find things in the repository than with paper records.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you work in health care , at a law office , in insurance , in a financial institution or virtually anything else heavily regulated by the government , you must keep paper copies of most of your stuff .
You just ca n't have a paperless office in those situations.Not true , at least for health care .
I work for a large pharmaceutical company and we use electronic records for nearly everything , including electronic signatures .
The document management system has to be Title 21 CFR Part 11 [ wikipedia.org ] compliant .
It 's much better than the days of having huge printed docs circulate between offices ( sometimes in multiple countries ) to get reviewed and signed .
The best part is that the documents are fully searchable , so it 's much easier to find things in the repository than with paper records .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you work in health care, at a law office, in insurance, in a financial institution or virtually anything else heavily regulated by the government, you must keep paper copies of most of your stuff.
You just can't have a paperless office in those situations.Not true, at least for health care.
I work for a large pharmaceutical company and we use electronic records for nearly everything, including electronic signatures.
The document management system has to be Title 21 CFR Part 11 [wikipedia.org] compliant.
It's much better than the days of having huge printed docs circulate between offices (sometimes in multiple countries) to get reviewed and signed.
The best part is that the documents are fully searchable, so it's much easier to find things in the repository than with paper records.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559834</id>
	<title>spare some change, mister?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269163860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work in the print industry, you insensitive clod!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in the print industry , you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in the print industry, you insensitive clod!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559558</id>
	<title>I tell you what</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1269205020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Me and my printers.  Muhahahahahah!!! Muhahahahaah!!! Mu
</p><p>
Eh, fuck it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Me and my printers .
Muhahahahahah ! ! ! Muhahahahaah ! ! !
Mu Eh , fuck it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Me and my printers.
Muhahahahahah!!! Muhahahahaah!!!
Mu

Eh, fuck it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564744</id>
	<title>Paperwork</title>
	<author>cgomezr</author>
	<datestamp>1269253020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm surprised that no one has mentioned this until now, but... paperwork.</p><p>Most of the paper I use is because they force me to hand in printed invoices, requests, certificates, copies of certificates, reports, etc. etc. etc.</p><p>Perhaps in other countries like the US it's not so bad, but in my country, all the main paperwork has to be done offline and with physical paper. And there's a LOT of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised that no one has mentioned this until now , but... paperwork.Most of the paper I use is because they force me to hand in printed invoices , requests , certificates , copies of certificates , reports , etc .
etc. etc.Perhaps in other countries like the US it 's not so bad , but in my country , all the main paperwork has to be done offline and with physical paper .
And there 's a LOT of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised that no one has mentioned this until now, but... paperwork.Most of the paper I use is because they force me to hand in printed invoices, requests, certificates, copies of certificates, reports, etc.
etc. etc.Perhaps in other countries like the US it's not so bad, but in my country, all the main paperwork has to be done offline and with physical paper.
And there's a LOT of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559388</id>
	<title>when was the last time</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1269204060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>when was the last time you took a computer monitor and folded it up and stuffed it in to an envelope, or in your pocket?
<br>
also a pen/pencil &amp; paper does not require a battery / electricity</htmltext>
<tokenext>when was the last time you took a computer monitor and folded it up and stuffed it in to an envelope , or in your pocket ?
also a pen/pencil &amp; paper does not require a battery / electricity</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when was the last time you took a computer monitor and folded it up and stuffed it in to an envelope, or in your pocket?
also a pen/pencil &amp; paper does not require a battery / electricity</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559544</id>
	<title>Re:Resistance Of Change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I quit my last job when my Outlook Todo list reached 500 entries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I quit my last job when my Outlook Todo list reached 500 entries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I quit my last job when my Outlook Todo list reached 500 entries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559900</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>Belial6</author>
	<datestamp>1269164280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My Windows 7 crashes at least once every couple of weeks.  The fact that I put a video card that lists it's requirement as needing a 200 watt power supply, and my computer only having an 80 watt power supply might have something to do with that though...</htmltext>
<tokenext>My Windows 7 crashes at least once every couple of weeks .
The fact that I put a video card that lists it 's requirement as needing a 200 watt power supply , and my computer only having an 80 watt power supply might have something to do with that though.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Windows 7 crashes at least once every couple of weeks.
The fact that I put a video card that lists it's requirement as needing a 200 watt power supply, and my computer only having an 80 watt power supply might have something to do with that though...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564640</id>
	<title>Re:Computers break. Books don't.</title>
	<author>raylu</author>
	<datestamp>1269251040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Digital data is still more reliable. You can backup the data so that when the computer breaks, you can resume your work at some point in the future. When you spill some coffee on a stack of papers and you didn't go through the cost of backing that up, you lose.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Digital data is still more reliable .
You can backup the data so that when the computer breaks , you can resume your work at some point in the future .
When you spill some coffee on a stack of papers and you did n't go through the cost of backing that up , you lose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Digital data is still more reliable.
You can backup the data so that when the computer breaks, you can resume your work at some point in the future.
When you spill some coffee on a stack of papers and you didn't go through the cost of backing that up, you lose.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559858</id>
	<title>Signatures</title>
	<author>randallman</author>
	<datestamp>1269164040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I implemented a simple electronic filing system for a group and found that signatures are the most difficult piece to replace.  Most people expect ink stained paper for certain documents and although there exists viable technical replacements, only those who understand those techniques feel comfortable with them.</p><p>Hard to believe, but when being consulted by another group wanting to implement a system like the one I did, their solution for a "digital signature" was to overlay a scanned image of the person's signature on the document as the one and only method of signing the document.  This came from the group (in a gov. agency) responsible for implementing the electronic filing system.  Also, at least locally, proper digital signatures haven't been tested in court and as a result, the decision makers aren't comfortable with them.</p><p>It seems clear to me at this point that ignorance is the biggest obstacle to using digital sigs.  A major cultural change is required to make this happen and it has to be made as easy as possible.  I think one approach that may be feasible is to associate a signing key with a physical object.  This may be as simple as putting a signing key on a USB drive as it may be easier to convey the importance of protecting the key and the consequences of someone else acquiring it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I implemented a simple electronic filing system for a group and found that signatures are the most difficult piece to replace .
Most people expect ink stained paper for certain documents and although there exists viable technical replacements , only those who understand those techniques feel comfortable with them.Hard to believe , but when being consulted by another group wanting to implement a system like the one I did , their solution for a " digital signature " was to overlay a scanned image of the person 's signature on the document as the one and only method of signing the document .
This came from the group ( in a gov .
agency ) responsible for implementing the electronic filing system .
Also , at least locally , proper digital signatures have n't been tested in court and as a result , the decision makers are n't comfortable with them.It seems clear to me at this point that ignorance is the biggest obstacle to using digital sigs .
A major cultural change is required to make this happen and it has to be made as easy as possible .
I think one approach that may be feasible is to associate a signing key with a physical object .
This may be as simple as putting a signing key on a USB drive as it may be easier to convey the importance of protecting the key and the consequences of someone else acquiring it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I implemented a simple electronic filing system for a group and found that signatures are the most difficult piece to replace.
Most people expect ink stained paper for certain documents and although there exists viable technical replacements, only those who understand those techniques feel comfortable with them.Hard to believe, but when being consulted by another group wanting to implement a system like the one I did, their solution for a "digital signature" was to overlay a scanned image of the person's signature on the document as the one and only method of signing the document.
This came from the group (in a gov.
agency) responsible for implementing the electronic filing system.
Also, at least locally, proper digital signatures haven't been tested in court and as a result, the decision makers aren't comfortable with them.It seems clear to me at this point that ignorance is the biggest obstacle to using digital sigs.
A major cultural change is required to make this happen and it has to be made as easy as possible.
I think one approach that may be feasible is to associate a signing key with a physical object.
This may be as simple as putting a signing key on a USB drive as it may be easier to convey the importance of protecting the key and the consequences of someone else acquiring it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561160</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>drx</author>
	<datestamp>1269172560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Anyone who equates an office with a toilet should not be designing software." -- Ted Nelson</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Anyone who equates an office with a toilet should not be designing software .
" -- Ted Nelson</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Anyone who equates an office with a toilet should not be designing software.
" -- Ted Nelson</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31571340</id>
	<title>Paperlessness.</title>
	<author>ResidentSourcerer</author>
	<datestamp>1269281520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1.  Drawing is hard on a computer.  But it's hard with a pencil too.  We took years to learn how to run a graphite stick in school.</p><p>2.  For typing and for linear tasks in general keyboards work well.  Adding a mouse, or learning all of vi/emacs move commands makes piecewise linear tasks (programming) faster.  I would not want to try to use Adobe Illustrator with a keyboard interface.  (Although I do use left hand on the keyboard, right hand on the wacom stylus.  Left hand changes/mods tools.)</p><p>3.  I once looked at paperless schools -- kids turn in their essays electronically, get marked by the teacher on screen, and returned for rewrites electronically.  However I never found anything that allowed a teacher to work with that was as fast as a red pencil.   The closest I ever saw was a NeXTStep application called, 'red pencil' that allowed you to use standard proof reader markup.  Still wasn't as fast.</p><p>4.  Screens aren't big enough.  Even with dual monitors.</p><p>The screen of my dreams:  It's a quarter cylinder laying across my desk on edge, with my eyes at the center of the arc. It runs from edge to edge of the desk.  It has programmable hyperbolic geometry.  As I move a window toward the edge, it shrinks. (but remains euclidian within the frame) This allows me to find stuff on my desktop.</p><p>5.  The computer needs to become a better secretary.  I need to talk to it.  Right now to email a document I have to:</p><p>a.  Select the gmail tab.<br>b.  Start an email to the recipient.<br>c.  Click attach file.<br>d.  Find the file in my file system.<br>e.  Say ok.<br>f.  Put a note in to give context<br>g.  Put a meaningfull subject line on it.<br>h.  Click send.</p><p>What we need to be able to do is say, "Thrall (or whatever you call your computer)  send this file to Mike Wingate"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Drawing is hard on a computer .
But it 's hard with a pencil too .
We took years to learn how to run a graphite stick in school.2 .
For typing and for linear tasks in general keyboards work well .
Adding a mouse , or learning all of vi/emacs move commands makes piecewise linear tasks ( programming ) faster .
I would not want to try to use Adobe Illustrator with a keyboard interface .
( Although I do use left hand on the keyboard , right hand on the wacom stylus .
Left hand changes/mods tools. ) 3 .
I once looked at paperless schools -- kids turn in their essays electronically , get marked by the teacher on screen , and returned for rewrites electronically .
However I never found anything that allowed a teacher to work with that was as fast as a red pencil .
The closest I ever saw was a NeXTStep application called , 'red pencil ' that allowed you to use standard proof reader markup .
Still was n't as fast.4 .
Screens are n't big enough .
Even with dual monitors.The screen of my dreams : It 's a quarter cylinder laying across my desk on edge , with my eyes at the center of the arc .
It runs from edge to edge of the desk .
It has programmable hyperbolic geometry .
As I move a window toward the edge , it shrinks .
( but remains euclidian within the frame ) This allows me to find stuff on my desktop.5 .
The computer needs to become a better secretary .
I need to talk to it .
Right now to email a document I have to : a. Select the gmail tab.b .
Start an email to the recipient.c .
Click attach file.d .
Find the file in my file system.e .
Say ok.f .
Put a note in to give contextg .
Put a meaningfull subject line on it.h .
Click send.What we need to be able to do is say , " Thrall ( or whatever you call your computer ) send this file to Mike Wingate "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Drawing is hard on a computer.
But it's hard with a pencil too.
We took years to learn how to run a graphite stick in school.2.
For typing and for linear tasks in general keyboards work well.
Adding a mouse, or learning all of vi/emacs move commands makes piecewise linear tasks (programming) faster.
I would not want to try to use Adobe Illustrator with a keyboard interface.
(Although I do use left hand on the keyboard, right hand on the wacom stylus.
Left hand changes/mods tools.)3.
I once looked at paperless schools -- kids turn in their essays electronically, get marked by the teacher on screen, and returned for rewrites electronically.
However I never found anything that allowed a teacher to work with that was as fast as a red pencil.
The closest I ever saw was a NeXTStep application called, 'red pencil' that allowed you to use standard proof reader markup.
Still wasn't as fast.4.
Screens aren't big enough.
Even with dual monitors.The screen of my dreams:  It's a quarter cylinder laying across my desk on edge, with my eyes at the center of the arc.
It runs from edge to edge of the desk.
It has programmable hyperbolic geometry.
As I move a window toward the edge, it shrinks.
(but remains euclidian within the frame) This allows me to find stuff on my desktop.5.
The computer needs to become a better secretary.
I need to talk to it.
Right now to email a document I have to:a.  Select the gmail tab.b.
Start an email to the recipient.c.
Click attach file.d.
Find the file in my file system.e.
Say ok.f.
Put a note in to give contextg.
Put a meaningfull subject line on it.h.
Click send.What we need to be able to do is say, "Thrall (or whatever you call your computer)  send this file to Mike Wingate"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564664</id>
	<title>Define "paperless"</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1269251760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All the official documents in my office are in electronic form. We print them only to read and annotate in meetings, but then the first thing we do is to correct the electronic form. Depending on your definition, one could call that "paperless". If we were to relocate, 99\% of the moved documents would be in electronic form.<br> <br>
Sometimes a weird procedure asks for a hand-signed form. This is the only case where we have "papered" documents. I suspect this is because of human habits and non-technical management that doesn't know the advantages of crypto-signing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All the official documents in my office are in electronic form .
We print them only to read and annotate in meetings , but then the first thing we do is to correct the electronic form .
Depending on your definition , one could call that " paperless " .
If we were to relocate , 99 \ % of the moved documents would be in electronic form .
Sometimes a weird procedure asks for a hand-signed form .
This is the only case where we have " papered " documents .
I suspect this is because of human habits and non-technical management that does n't know the advantages of crypto-signing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the official documents in my office are in electronic form.
We print them only to read and annotate in meetings, but then the first thing we do is to correct the electronic form.
Depending on your definition, one could call that "paperless".
If we were to relocate, 99\% of the moved documents would be in electronic form.
Sometimes a weird procedure asks for a hand-signed form.
This is the only case where we have "papered" documents.
I suspect this is because of human habits and non-technical management that doesn't know the advantages of crypto-signing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559464</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why not write an algorithm that 'humanizes' a pre-saved signature?  It could even be randomized/humanized (i.e., pixels pushed around) in such a way (i.e., by a private key) as to be verifiable by a public key (a la digital signing).  So, given the randomized sig, a copy of the original sig, and a public key, one could verify if the randomized sig is valid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not write an algorithm that 'humanizes ' a pre-saved signature ?
It could even be randomized/humanized ( i.e. , pixels pushed around ) in such a way ( i.e. , by a private key ) as to be verifiable by a public key ( a la digital signing ) .
So , given the randomized sig , a copy of the original sig , and a public key , one could verify if the randomized sig is valid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not write an algorithm that 'humanizes' a pre-saved signature?
It could even be randomized/humanized (i.e., pixels pushed around) in such a way (i.e., by a private key) as to be verifiable by a public key (a la digital signing).
So, given the randomized sig, a copy of the original sig, and a public key, one could verify if the randomized sig is valid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564594</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>raylu</author>
	<datestamp>1269250380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So your software sucks, even though better, more reliable alternatives exist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So your software sucks , even though better , more reliable alternatives exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So your software sucks, even though better, more reliable alternatives exist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563046</id>
	<title>How about just a "reduced" paper office</title>
	<author>nica</author>
	<datestamp>1269187380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the idea of a "paperless" office is a bit extreme. Lots of people have reduced the amount of paper they use in the office, and I think this trend will continue. Going truly "paperless" strikes me as either a buzzword not to be taken seriously, or a perfectionist's notion of how a modern office should be. I've notice my boss talks of having "gone paperless" and indeed I see very little paperwork in in office, but I do notice him aways keeping a small notebook in his shirt pocket. He's a wise man.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the idea of a " paperless " office is a bit extreme .
Lots of people have reduced the amount of paper they use in the office , and I think this trend will continue .
Going truly " paperless " strikes me as either a buzzword not to be taken seriously , or a perfectionist 's notion of how a modern office should be .
I 've notice my boss talks of having " gone paperless " and indeed I see very little paperwork in in office , but I do notice him aways keeping a small notebook in his shirt pocket .
He 's a wise man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the idea of a "paperless" office is a bit extreme.
Lots of people have reduced the amount of paper they use in the office, and I think this trend will continue.
Going truly "paperless" strikes me as either a buzzword not to be taken seriously, or a perfectionist's notion of how a modern office should be.
I've notice my boss talks of having "gone paperless" and indeed I see very little paperwork in in office, but I do notice him aways keeping a small notebook in his shirt pocket.
He's a wise man.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560044</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>pacergh</author>
	<datestamp>1269165120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is nothing magical about a signature.  It is just one possible form of evidence that an agreement has been reached.  Very few contracts require signatures, and all of those that do provide non-mechanical means of meeting that signature.</p><p>Even so, it's nice to have a signature than to have to provide other evidence.  And it's a lot cheaper, typically.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is nothing magical about a signature .
It is just one possible form of evidence that an agreement has been reached .
Very few contracts require signatures , and all of those that do provide non-mechanical means of meeting that signature.Even so , it 's nice to have a signature than to have to provide other evidence .
And it 's a lot cheaper , typically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is nothing magical about a signature.
It is just one possible form of evidence that an agreement has been reached.
Very few contracts require signatures, and all of those that do provide non-mechanical means of meeting that signature.Even so, it's nice to have a signature than to have to provide other evidence.
And it's a lot cheaper, typically.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562824</id>
	<title>Re:Resistance Of Change</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1269185460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>99\% of the employees have 10-30 yellow stickys stuck all over their desk for reminders. People seem somehow amazed and awestruck by my clean and streamlined desk</p> </div><p>How else do you let the boss know you have 10-30 important things that you MUST get done? He probably thinks you do no work. You're probably about to lose your job, all because you don't have sticky notes!!! Quick man, get a sticky note pad!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>99 \ % of the employees have 10-30 yellow stickys stuck all over their desk for reminders .
People seem somehow amazed and awestruck by my clean and streamlined desk How else do you let the boss know you have 10-30 important things that you MUST get done ?
He probably thinks you do no work .
You 're probably about to lose your job , all because you do n't have sticky notes ! ! !
Quick man , get a sticky note pad !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>99\% of the employees have 10-30 yellow stickys stuck all over their desk for reminders.
People seem somehow amazed and awestruck by my clean and streamlined desk How else do you let the boss know you have 10-30 important things that you MUST get done?
He probably thinks you do no work.
You're probably about to lose your job, all because you don't have sticky notes!!!
Quick man, get a sticky note pad!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560030</id>
	<title>Re:Workflow</title>
	<author>OzPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1269165060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If I was going to draw what I wanted in the computer anyway, why do we need CAD guys? (hint: they are less expensive per hour, to be cynical. But that lets us get more work done overall).</p></div><p>And in a nutshell that is partially what happened to secretaries and typing pools years ago - as with the miracle of the word processor who needed them any more.  So now you have highly paid people obsessing over something that was previously outsourced to cheaper labor.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I was going to draw what I wanted in the computer anyway , why do we need CAD guys ?
( hint : they are less expensive per hour , to be cynical .
But that lets us get more work done overall ) .And in a nutshell that is partially what happened to secretaries and typing pools years ago - as with the miracle of the word processor who needed them any more .
So now you have highly paid people obsessing over something that was previously outsourced to cheaper labor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I was going to draw what I wanted in the computer anyway, why do we need CAD guys?
(hint: they are less expensive per hour, to be cynical.
But that lets us get more work done overall).And in a nutshell that is partially what happened to secretaries and typing pools years ago - as with the miracle of the word processor who needed them any more.
So now you have highly paid people obsessing over something that was previously outsourced to cheaper labor.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559654</id>
	<title>Computers break. Books don't.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269162660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean, so as to be completely unusable. I have books that are torn, missing spines, water damaged, defaced, and they still work. With no other hardware. Even during a power cut, or on the beach, and without any kind of hardware, and no language problems even after centuries. Paper is just superior technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , so as to be completely unusable .
I have books that are torn , missing spines , water damaged , defaced , and they still work .
With no other hardware .
Even during a power cut , or on the beach , and without any kind of hardware , and no language problems even after centuries .
Paper is just superior technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, so as to be completely unusable.
I have books that are torn, missing spines, water damaged, defaced, and they still work.
With no other hardware.
Even during a power cut, or on the beach, and without any kind of hardware, and no language problems even after centuries.
Paper is just superior technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563622</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269192720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work in the insurance industry.  My company actually works with lots of insurance companies.  When we get paper documents they are scanned into our document management system.  With a few exceptions, the paper is shredded and recycled a couple days later.  Because insurance companies are always involved in lawsuits we get subpoenas all the time.  It happens so often that our document management system has tools to help the legal department respond to those subpoenas.  To the best of my knowledge no one has ever successfully challenged our decision to shred most paper documents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in the insurance industry .
My company actually works with lots of insurance companies .
When we get paper documents they are scanned into our document management system .
With a few exceptions , the paper is shredded and recycled a couple days later .
Because insurance companies are always involved in lawsuits we get subpoenas all the time .
It happens so often that our document management system has tools to help the legal department respond to those subpoenas .
To the best of my knowledge no one has ever successfully challenged our decision to shred most paper documents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in the insurance industry.
My company actually works with lots of insurance companies.
When we get paper documents they are scanned into our document management system.
With a few exceptions, the paper is shredded and recycled a couple days later.
Because insurance companies are always involved in lawsuits we get subpoenas all the time.
It happens so often that our document management system has tools to help the legal department respond to those subpoenas.
To the best of my knowledge no one has ever successfully challenged our decision to shred most paper documents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565394</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269263040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.</p></div><p>That how dildos were invented??....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.That how dildos were invented ?
? ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.That how dildos were invented?
?....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31585634</id>
	<title>Re:We've been talking about this a lot lately</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269366600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Younger employees seem very eager to do this, but older employees, some of whom have worked with a paper process for 20+ years, really do not like this idea at all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</i> </p><p>I once worked at a place where big screens were given mainly to people whose work required them. But a few of the older guys were able to get them by saying the older, smaller  screens were too hard on their eyes. The "ergonomic" argument allowed them to score a big screen much sooner than regular obsolescence would have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Younger employees seem very eager to do this , but older employees , some of whom have worked with a paper process for 20 + years , really do not like this idea at all .... I once worked at a place where big screens were given mainly to people whose work required them .
But a few of the older guys were able to get them by saying the older , smaller screens were too hard on their eyes .
The " ergonomic " argument allowed them to score a big screen much sooner than regular obsolescence would have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Younger employees seem very eager to do this, but older employees, some of whom have worked with a paper process for 20+ years, really do not like this idea at all .... I once worked at a place where big screens were given mainly to people whose work required them.
But a few of the older guys were able to get them by saying the older, smaller  screens were too hard on their eyes.
The "ergonomic" argument allowed them to score a big screen much sooner than regular obsolescence would have.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559706</id>
	<title>Re:My office is paperless for years</title>
	<author>5pp000</author>
	<datestamp>1269162960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Me too; I've been nearly paperless for a good 25 years.  I almost never print out working material; I occasionally print things to file or send to someone else.  I suppose it takes a little determination, but really it isn't that difficult, or hasn't been for me.

</p><p>Large monitors certainly help.  I tile six Emacs subwindows across a 1920x1200 screen (two vertically x 3 horizontally), and I have plenty of ability to look at multiple pieces of source code at the same time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Me too ; I 've been nearly paperless for a good 25 years .
I almost never print out working material ; I occasionally print things to file or send to someone else .
I suppose it takes a little determination , but really it is n't that difficult , or has n't been for me .
Large monitors certainly help .
I tile six Emacs subwindows across a 1920x1200 screen ( two vertically x 3 horizontally ) , and I have plenty of ability to look at multiple pieces of source code at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Me too; I've been nearly paperless for a good 25 years.
I almost never print out working material; I occasionally print things to file or send to someone else.
I suppose it takes a little determination, but really it isn't that difficult, or hasn't been for me.
Large monitors certainly help.
I tile six Emacs subwindows across a 1920x1200 screen (two vertically x 3 horizontally), and I have plenty of ability to look at multiple pieces of source code at the same time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559574</id>
	<title>Speaking for myself...</title>
	<author>Hortensia Patel</author>
	<datestamp>1269205140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking for myself... nothing. I haven't printed anything either at the office or at home for at least five years. Not out of any technophile or tree-hugging principles; I just haven't felt the need.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking for myself... nothing. I have n't printed anything either at the office or at home for at least five years .
Not out of any technophile or tree-hugging principles ; I just have n't felt the need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking for myself... nothing. I haven't printed anything either at the office or at home for at least five years.
Not out of any technophile or tree-hugging principles; I just haven't felt the need.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31568258</id>
	<title>Re:My office is paperless for years</title>
	<author>Cro Magnon</author>
	<datestamp>1269272460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Some say they don't trust Windows (or any other OS, I guess) with their data. That's what backups are for. When was the last time you did a backup of all your papers, by the way? Papers are easy to lose and nearly impossible to find when you need them.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Totally agree!  Not to mention decyphering the crappy scribble you did when in a hurry.</p><p>My printer at home is broken.  I've needed a new one for awhile, but as little as I use it, I hate to fork out the money.  That last time I had to print something from home, I just emailed my work address and printed it from work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some say they do n't trust Windows ( or any other OS , I guess ) with their data .
That 's what backups are for .
When was the last time you did a backup of all your papers , by the way ?
Papers are easy to lose and nearly impossible to find when you need them .
Totally agree !
Not to mention decyphering the crappy scribble you did when in a hurry.My printer at home is broken .
I 've needed a new one for awhile , but as little as I use it , I hate to fork out the money .
That last time I had to print something from home , I just emailed my work address and printed it from work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some say they don't trust Windows (or any other OS, I guess) with their data.
That's what backups are for.
When was the last time you did a backup of all your papers, by the way?
Papers are easy to lose and nearly impossible to find when you need them.
Totally agree!
Not to mention decyphering the crappy scribble you did when in a hurry.My printer at home is broken.
I've needed a new one for awhile, but as little as I use it, I hate to fork out the money.
That last time I had to print something from home, I just emailed my work address and printed it from work.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31567964</id>
	<title>I work for the government</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269271740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>where everything gets printed, so the politicians can look at a pretty posterboard to make their decisions.</p><p>If anything, the technology has moved us farther away from the paperless office, by making it easier to print copies of everything.   Rather than a triplicate form that requires you to press hard when you write, we can print a copy for anyone remotely interested in a document - and we do.  Rather than deciding what is important enough to write down and store in our hard files, we are storing everything.  To make matters worse, computers have greatly increased our ability to put out large volumes of data.  In my city's engineering department, the same project that in 1950 took 5 pages of blueprints (counting the cover sheet) now takes 3 bound volumes.  "This standard drawing might apply" means "go ahead and put it in too," so out of 10 pages of standard plumbing details, there might be 1 single fixture that is reelvant to the project.  Standard sheets drawn by the state department of transportation get included - with hundreds of X-ed out drawings on the parts that aren't relevant.  It is easier to just insert the sheets than it is to redraw only the relevant portions.  Any by law the engineering department has to store 2 hard copies, in perpetuity.  I can find drawings of the last 3 city hall buildings (2 of which no longer exist), and 20-year-old as-built drawings for the current city hall, but somehow the most recent renovations, alarm upgrade, AC replacement, and network wiring projects never got included - and the (manual) filing system is woefully overloaded, as it is the same filing system that has existed for 70 years - fine for 5 pages of blueprints per project, not so good for 500.</p><p>Operating departments arent any better.  Person who takes a call puts in a work order, and generally prints a hard copy.  Another copy or two get printed up as part of the "which department does this go to?" process.  Boss in relevant department prints a copy, before the person actually taking action prints a copy.  Then records of the action/response are made, printed, and stored - so each person can say "this is what I did in answer to that issue."  If multiple departments are involved, their communication with eachother gets stored, (at both ends,) in case there is later a disagreement over who did what, and if it was proper.</p><p>I hear from lawyers that things get even worse in that field - since so much of contracting is cut-and-paste, every time a contract is written, it is a little longer than the last one.  Hard copy of various drafts get stored, as well as the final version of the contract.  And every lawyer involved keeps a separate set, hard copy.  The volume of documents in law offices is easily 10 times or more what it was for the same sized office 25 years ago.</p><p>Even if we get selective and only keep the most important 10\% of files as hard copy, the amount keeps growing daily.</p><p>And why does everyone insist on keeping their own, paper copy?  The IT departments have this habit of losing our files.  Lowest-bidder software contracts mean constant software changes - for a long time, the city switched from Word to WordPerfect (or back) every 2 years, meaning most of the staff had to retrain, and create a new set of forms.  New software means learning new ways to access our old files, and any upgrade might be the one that loses our old archives - maybe they forgot to tell us the new computers won't have disk drives, until after the trade-in occurred, or maybe the new email archiving system didn't handle attachments on old emails.</p><p>Bureacracy makes it harder to reduce paper.  Outdated filing systems that haven't been updated in the lifetime of many of the employees don't help.  Computers making it easier and easier to generate large volumes of documents, (but not trustworthy enough that we can do without hard copy,) push us FURTHER from the so-called "paperless office."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>where everything gets printed , so the politicians can look at a pretty posterboard to make their decisions.If anything , the technology has moved us farther away from the paperless office , by making it easier to print copies of everything .
Rather than a triplicate form that requires you to press hard when you write , we can print a copy for anyone remotely interested in a document - and we do .
Rather than deciding what is important enough to write down and store in our hard files , we are storing everything .
To make matters worse , computers have greatly increased our ability to put out large volumes of data .
In my city 's engineering department , the same project that in 1950 took 5 pages of blueprints ( counting the cover sheet ) now takes 3 bound volumes .
" This standard drawing might apply " means " go ahead and put it in too , " so out of 10 pages of standard plumbing details , there might be 1 single fixture that is reelvant to the project .
Standard sheets drawn by the state department of transportation get included - with hundreds of X-ed out drawings on the parts that are n't relevant .
It is easier to just insert the sheets than it is to redraw only the relevant portions .
Any by law the engineering department has to store 2 hard copies , in perpetuity .
I can find drawings of the last 3 city hall buildings ( 2 of which no longer exist ) , and 20-year-old as-built drawings for the current city hall , but somehow the most recent renovations , alarm upgrade , AC replacement , and network wiring projects never got included - and the ( manual ) filing system is woefully overloaded , as it is the same filing system that has existed for 70 years - fine for 5 pages of blueprints per project , not so good for 500.Operating departments arent any better .
Person who takes a call puts in a work order , and generally prints a hard copy .
Another copy or two get printed up as part of the " which department does this go to ?
" process .
Boss in relevant department prints a copy , before the person actually taking action prints a copy .
Then records of the action/response are made , printed , and stored - so each person can say " this is what I did in answer to that issue .
" If multiple departments are involved , their communication with eachother gets stored , ( at both ends , ) in case there is later a disagreement over who did what , and if it was proper.I hear from lawyers that things get even worse in that field - since so much of contracting is cut-and-paste , every time a contract is written , it is a little longer than the last one .
Hard copy of various drafts get stored , as well as the final version of the contract .
And every lawyer involved keeps a separate set , hard copy .
The volume of documents in law offices is easily 10 times or more what it was for the same sized office 25 years ago.Even if we get selective and only keep the most important 10 \ % of files as hard copy , the amount keeps growing daily.And why does everyone insist on keeping their own , paper copy ?
The IT departments have this habit of losing our files .
Lowest-bidder software contracts mean constant software changes - for a long time , the city switched from Word to WordPerfect ( or back ) every 2 years , meaning most of the staff had to retrain , and create a new set of forms .
New software means learning new ways to access our old files , and any upgrade might be the one that loses our old archives - maybe they forgot to tell us the new computers wo n't have disk drives , until after the trade-in occurred , or maybe the new email archiving system did n't handle attachments on old emails.Bureacracy makes it harder to reduce paper .
Outdated filing systems that have n't been updated in the lifetime of many of the employees do n't help .
Computers making it easier and easier to generate large volumes of documents , ( but not trustworthy enough that we can do without hard copy , ) push us FURTHER from the so-called " paperless office .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>where everything gets printed, so the politicians can look at a pretty posterboard to make their decisions.If anything, the technology has moved us farther away from the paperless office, by making it easier to print copies of everything.
Rather than a triplicate form that requires you to press hard when you write, we can print a copy for anyone remotely interested in a document - and we do.
Rather than deciding what is important enough to write down and store in our hard files, we are storing everything.
To make matters worse, computers have greatly increased our ability to put out large volumes of data.
In my city's engineering department, the same project that in 1950 took 5 pages of blueprints (counting the cover sheet) now takes 3 bound volumes.
"This standard drawing might apply" means "go ahead and put it in too," so out of 10 pages of standard plumbing details, there might be 1 single fixture that is reelvant to the project.
Standard sheets drawn by the state department of transportation get included - with hundreds of X-ed out drawings on the parts that aren't relevant.
It is easier to just insert the sheets than it is to redraw only the relevant portions.
Any by law the engineering department has to store 2 hard copies, in perpetuity.
I can find drawings of the last 3 city hall buildings (2 of which no longer exist), and 20-year-old as-built drawings for the current city hall, but somehow the most recent renovations, alarm upgrade, AC replacement, and network wiring projects never got included - and the (manual) filing system is woefully overloaded, as it is the same filing system that has existed for 70 years - fine for 5 pages of blueprints per project, not so good for 500.Operating departments arent any better.
Person who takes a call puts in a work order, and generally prints a hard copy.
Another copy or two get printed up as part of the "which department does this go to?
" process.
Boss in relevant department prints a copy, before the person actually taking action prints a copy.
Then records of the action/response are made, printed, and stored - so each person can say "this is what I did in answer to that issue.
"  If multiple departments are involved, their communication with eachother gets stored, (at both ends,) in case there is later a disagreement over who did what, and if it was proper.I hear from lawyers that things get even worse in that field - since so much of contracting is cut-and-paste, every time a contract is written, it is a little longer than the last one.
Hard copy of various drafts get stored, as well as the final version of the contract.
And every lawyer involved keeps a separate set, hard copy.
The volume of documents in law offices is easily 10 times or more what it was for the same sized office 25 years ago.Even if we get selective and only keep the most important 10\% of files as hard copy, the amount keeps growing daily.And why does everyone insist on keeping their own, paper copy?
The IT departments have this habit of losing our files.
Lowest-bidder software contracts mean constant software changes - for a long time, the city switched from Word to WordPerfect (or back) every 2 years, meaning most of the staff had to retrain, and create a new set of forms.
New software means learning new ways to access our old files, and any upgrade might be the one that loses our old archives - maybe they forgot to tell us the new computers won't have disk drives, until after the trade-in occurred, or maybe the new email archiving system didn't handle attachments on old emails.Bureacracy makes it harder to reduce paper.
Outdated filing systems that haven't been updated in the lifetime of many of the employees don't help.
Computers making it easier and easier to generate large volumes of documents, (but not trustworthy enough that we can do without hard copy,) push us FURTHER from the so-called "paperless office.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559470</id>
	<title>Ask the paper companies ....</title>
	<author>wsanders</author>
	<datestamp>1269204480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... that deliver 20,000 lb of paper to my workplace every few weeks or so. And the 1 printer for every 5 workers ratio is not getting any better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... that deliver 20,000 lb of paper to my workplace every few weeks or so .
And the 1 printer for every 5 workers ratio is not getting any better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... that deliver 20,000 lb of paper to my workplace every few weeks or so.
And the 1 printer for every 5 workers ratio is not getting any better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</id>
	<title>Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>"A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet. Some things would be impractical..."<br>
OK, it's not that old a saying, but it's valid in a number of ways.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet .
Some things would be impractical... " OK , it 's not that old a saying , but it 's valid in a number of ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet.
Some things would be impractical..."
OK, it's not that old a saying, but it's valid in a number of ways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561236</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269173040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Instead of paper you could use water, hand (just use your other hand for eating) or cloth in the toilet. Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.</p></div><p>So, to return to the discussion at hand....your suggestion for a paperless office is to write on your hand or your shirt?</p><p>I think what the OP was saying is that no matter how much you want to abolish paper, it isn't going to happen. You can probably get rid of 90\% of its uses and turn paper into a convenience. Wipe your ass however you want, though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of paper you could use water , hand ( just use your other hand for eating ) or cloth in the toilet .
Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.So , to return to the discussion at hand....your suggestion for a paperless office is to write on your hand or your shirt ? I think what the OP was saying is that no matter how much you want to abolish paper , it is n't going to happen .
You can probably get rid of 90 \ % of its uses and turn paper into a convenience .
Wipe your ass however you want , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of paper you could use water, hand (just use your other hand for eating) or cloth in the toilet.
Ancient Romans used a cloth around a stick and it worked fine for them.So, to return to the discussion at hand....your suggestion for a paperless office is to write on your hand or your shirt?I think what the OP was saying is that no matter how much you want to abolish paper, it isn't going to happen.
You can probably get rid of 90\% of its uses and turn paper into a convenience.
Wipe your ass however you want, though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560356</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>xaxa</author>
	<datestamp>1269167160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it.  Contrast that to Windows.</p></div><p> <i>"The bombing resulted in a number of companies changing their working practices, and drawing up plans to deal with any future incidents. Documents were blown out of windows of multi-storey buildings by the force of the explosion, prompting the police to use a shredder to destroy all documents found. This resulted in risk managers subsequently demanding a "clear desk" policy at the end of each working day to improve information security."</i> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993\_Bishopsgate\_bombing#Aftermath" title="wikipedia.org">Link</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Done properly, electronic records can be made more secure and more accessible than paper records. Fire or flood in the office? Say goodbye to your paper records, but you'll still have your electronic ones. (Of course, plenty of organisations have the worst of both -- improperly backed-up electronic records.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never had my desk crash , losing all pieces of paper on it .
Contrast that to Windows .
" The bombing resulted in a number of companies changing their working practices , and drawing up plans to deal with any future incidents .
Documents were blown out of windows of multi-storey buildings by the force of the explosion , prompting the police to use a shredder to destroy all documents found .
This resulted in risk managers subsequently demanding a " clear desk " policy at the end of each working day to improve information security .
" Link [ wikipedia.org ] Done properly , electronic records can be made more secure and more accessible than paper records .
Fire or flood in the office ?
Say goodbye to your paper records , but you 'll still have your electronic ones .
( Of course , plenty of organisations have the worst of both -- improperly backed-up electronic records .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it.
Contrast that to Windows.
"The bombing resulted in a number of companies changing their working practices, and drawing up plans to deal with any future incidents.
Documents were blown out of windows of multi-storey buildings by the force of the explosion, prompting the police to use a shredder to destroy all documents found.
This resulted in risk managers subsequently demanding a "clear desk" policy at the end of each working day to improve information security.
" Link [wikipedia.org]Done properly, electronic records can be made more secure and more accessible than paper records.
Fire or flood in the office?
Say goodbye to your paper records, but you'll still have your electronic ones.
(Of course, plenty of organisations have the worst of both -- improperly backed-up electronic records.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560342</id>
	<title>Re:The paperless toilet.</title>
	<author>Platinumrat</author>
	<datestamp>1269167100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, if you go to any Muslim country, that's what you'll be faced with.  A paperless toilet.  I must admit that you never get used to a bidet.  <p>PS: Never except anything handed to you by a muslim if he uses his left hand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if you go to any Muslim country , that 's what you 'll be faced with .
A paperless toilet .
I must admit that you never get used to a bidet .
PS : Never except anything handed to you by a muslim if he uses his left hand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if you go to any Muslim country, that's what you'll be faced with.
A paperless toilet.
I must admit that you never get used to a bidet.
PS: Never except anything handed to you by a muslim if he uses his left hand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559494</id>
	<title>What Is Holding Back the Paperless Office?</title>
	<author>K. S. Kyosuke</author>
	<datestamp>1269204600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Uhm...the abundance of cheap laser printers? (And I would rather see greater proliferation of cheaper e-ink devices.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uhm...the abundance of cheap laser printers ?
( And I would rather see greater proliferation of cheaper e-ink devices .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uhm...the abundance of cheap laser printers?
(And I would rather see greater proliferation of cheaper e-ink devices.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31566658</id>
	<title>Re:Word Processors are holding us back...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269268380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with you. I think it's time to re-invent the wheel for the common user.</p><p>What you need is a word processor and not MS Word.<br>In a word processor, you type in the text on the screen; the raw material of what you want to base your document on. A word processor does not constrain itself to any paper sizes. The only concern when working in the word processor should be puncuation and grammar.<br>When you are finished writing your text you save it and import it into a document layout program (DTP, desktop publishing). In this program you set up the document constraints, papersize, text-flow boxes, images and whatnot. The final product can now be printed or exported in all its glory.<br>This was 10 years ago and is still widely used in the printing industry.</p><p>Unfortunately, Microsoft successfully has blurred the line of what used to be clearly defined applications. Word is not really a word processor and not really a layout program. It's a sort of WYSIWYG (but not really because it's not consistent) editor for the masses. It's quite popular because people have gotten used to the impracicality of it perhaps because they never saw the word processor/DTP combination before. I consider it fine to use for dirty drafts but not much else - It's a constant fight between what layout the editor thinks you want and what you know you want. And now MS Word is turning more and more into a collaboration tool as well (God help us all).</p><p>As we all know, there are many MS Word imitators that does more or less the same thing (Open Office, KOffice etc) and unless you look for alternative ways of working with text you will be stuck with the frustration. There are alternatives though. If you wish to do it old-school (which is really efficient) you can use InDesign/Framemaker or something similar. An alternative way of working with text is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LyX" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">LyX</a> [wikipedia.org]  which takes a while to get used to but will save you time.</p><p>Don't despair. There are alternatives! Good luck</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with you .
I think it 's time to re-invent the wheel for the common user.What you need is a word processor and not MS Word.In a word processor , you type in the text on the screen ; the raw material of what you want to base your document on .
A word processor does not constrain itself to any paper sizes .
The only concern when working in the word processor should be puncuation and grammar.When you are finished writing your text you save it and import it into a document layout program ( DTP , desktop publishing ) .
In this program you set up the document constraints , papersize , text-flow boxes , images and whatnot .
The final product can now be printed or exported in all its glory.This was 10 years ago and is still widely used in the printing industry.Unfortunately , Microsoft successfully has blurred the line of what used to be clearly defined applications .
Word is not really a word processor and not really a layout program .
It 's a sort of WYSIWYG ( but not really because it 's not consistent ) editor for the masses .
It 's quite popular because people have gotten used to the impracicality of it perhaps because they never saw the word processor/DTP combination before .
I consider it fine to use for dirty drafts but not much else - It 's a constant fight between what layout the editor thinks you want and what you know you want .
And now MS Word is turning more and more into a collaboration tool as well ( God help us all ) .As we all know , there are many MS Word imitators that does more or less the same thing ( Open Office , KOffice etc ) and unless you look for alternative ways of working with text you will be stuck with the frustration .
There are alternatives though .
If you wish to do it old-school ( which is really efficient ) you can use InDesign/Framemaker or something similar .
An alternative way of working with text is LyX [ wikipedia.org ] which takes a while to get used to but will save you time.Do n't despair .
There are alternatives !
Good luck</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with you.
I think it's time to re-invent the wheel for the common user.What you need is a word processor and not MS Word.In a word processor, you type in the text on the screen; the raw material of what you want to base your document on.
A word processor does not constrain itself to any paper sizes.
The only concern when working in the word processor should be puncuation and grammar.When you are finished writing your text you save it and import it into a document layout program (DTP, desktop publishing).
In this program you set up the document constraints, papersize, text-flow boxes, images and whatnot.
The final product can now be printed or exported in all its glory.This was 10 years ago and is still widely used in the printing industry.Unfortunately, Microsoft successfully has blurred the line of what used to be clearly defined applications.
Word is not really a word processor and not really a layout program.
It's a sort of WYSIWYG (but not really because it's not consistent) editor for the masses.
It's quite popular because people have gotten used to the impracicality of it perhaps because they never saw the word processor/DTP combination before.
I consider it fine to use for dirty drafts but not much else - It's a constant fight between what layout the editor thinks you want and what you know you want.
And now MS Word is turning more and more into a collaboration tool as well (God help us all).As we all know, there are many MS Word imitators that does more or less the same thing (Open Office, KOffice etc) and unless you look for alternative ways of working with text you will be stuck with the frustration.
There are alternatives though.
If you wish to do it old-school (which is really efficient) you can use InDesign/Framemaker or something similar.
An alternative way of working with text is LyX [wikipedia.org]  which takes a while to get used to but will save you time.Don't despair.
There are alternatives!
Good luck</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563062</id>
	<title>Meetings!</title>
	<author>phreakincool</author>
	<datestamp>1269187500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All those fraking office meetings and all the idiots who seem to conjure them up at a whim.  They usually have to put stuff on paper so it makes them look like they know what the hell they are talking about.
<br> <br>
Did I mention the meetings?</htmltext>
<tokenext>All those fraking office meetings and all the idiots who seem to conjure them up at a whim .
They usually have to put stuff on paper so it makes them look like they know what the hell they are talking about .
Did I mention the meetings ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All those fraking office meetings and all the idiots who seem to conjure them up at a whim.
They usually have to put stuff on paper so it makes them look like they know what the hell they are talking about.
Did I mention the meetings?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560672</id>
	<title>Smart man</title>
	<author>DaveAtWorkAnnoyingly</author>
	<datestamp>1269169380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A man much smarter than I once said: "A paperless office is about as likely as a paperless toilet...".

Now, where were those three sea shells?</htmltext>
<tokenext>A man much smarter than I once said : " A paperless office is about as likely as a paperless toilet... " .
Now , where were those three sea shells ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A man much smarter than I once said: "A paperless office is about as likely as a paperless toilet...".
Now, where were those three sea shells?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560164</id>
	<title>What Is Holding Back Paperless Office: One World</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269166020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">Microcrap</a> [microsoft.com].</p><p>Go ahead. Mod me down.</p><p>Yours In Astrakhan,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microcrap [ microsoft.com ] .Go ahead .
Mod me down.Yours In Astrakhan,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microcrap [microsoft.com].Go ahead.
Mod me down.Yours In Astrakhan,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561222</id>
	<title>Re:Prices &amp; UI...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269172980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...and a stupid-simple UI...</p></div><p>Ideally, this would consist of two buttons: "Next Page" and "Last Page".  That's all you need to replicate a notepad.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and a stupid-simple UI...Ideally , this would consist of two buttons : " Next Page " and " Last Page " .
That 's all you need to replicate a notepad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...and a stupid-simple UI...Ideally, this would consist of two buttons: "Next Page" and "Last Page".
That's all you need to replicate a notepad.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559358</id>
	<title>Retention</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269203760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ask anyone that works in the medical industry.</p><p>It's just so hard to trust digital documents for life-long recording purposes like medical records. Thus, each time something is documented, two copies of it are made, perhaps one digital and one physical, and then copies of each of those are made, and then all are stored separately.</p><p>Unless everything in your business is throw-away, or you have all sorts of faith in your backup methods, it's the most stable method of retaining documents over a lengthy period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ask anyone that works in the medical industry.It 's just so hard to trust digital documents for life-long recording purposes like medical records .
Thus , each time something is documented , two copies of it are made , perhaps one digital and one physical , and then copies of each of those are made , and then all are stored separately.Unless everything in your business is throw-away , or you have all sorts of faith in your backup methods , it 's the most stable method of retaining documents over a lengthy period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ask anyone that works in the medical industry.It's just so hard to trust digital documents for life-long recording purposes like medical records.
Thus, each time something is documented, two copies of it are made, perhaps one digital and one physical, and then copies of each of those are made, and then all are stored separately.Unless everything in your business is throw-away, or you have all sorts of faith in your backup methods, it's the most stable method of retaining documents over a lengthy period.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559792</id>
	<title>Computer illeteracy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269163500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's the fact that a majority of people are computer illiterate and are afraid to be 100\% dependent on IT to recover their documents. It is basically the old people, those who are here commenting on how great paper is, that make paper necessary. They are afraid of losing control, because all they know is paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the fact that a majority of people are computer illiterate and are afraid to be 100 \ % dependent on IT to recover their documents .
It is basically the old people , those who are here commenting on how great paper is , that make paper necessary .
They are afraid of losing control , because all they know is paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the fact that a majority of people are computer illiterate and are afraid to be 100\% dependent on IT to recover their documents.
It is basically the old people, those who are here commenting on how great paper is, that make paper necessary.
They are afraid of losing control, because all they know is paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561620</id>
	<title>Backups</title>
	<author>sjbe</author>
	<datestamp>1269176460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it. Contrast that to Windows.</p></div><p>Likewise I can easily and quickly back up my computerized work, whereas making photocopies of all my paper documents is so time consuming as to be infeasible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never had my desk crash , losing all pieces of paper on it .
Contrast that to Windows.Likewise I can easily and quickly back up my computerized work , whereas making photocopies of all my paper documents is so time consuming as to be infeasible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it.
Contrast that to Windows.Likewise I can easily and quickly back up my computerized work, whereas making photocopies of all my paper documents is so time consuming as to be infeasible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559512</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still have to do a lot of research in the library. When I hold a book in my hand, I wish I could just type in keywords to search for the sections I wanted, and be able to e-mail myself the content so I don't have to lug these books around. And I would return a book only to realize I still need a quick look. What about a book in a foreign language that I wish could be translated on the fly, and maybe have my search term translated to that language to be searched? Library staff still spends a lot of time sorting and re-shelving books. If a book is mis-shelved, you might as well consider it lost forever. Books also need 24/7 air conditioning if you want to preserve them well.</p><p>Electronic document might be more costly to maintain, but I think people should realize not all documents need to be kept on a live machine. Most documents could be kept in offline media as long as we have an online index which is relatively small. The most popular electronic documents will be online. In effect, we make the offline media a part of the computer memory hierarchy, and apply locality principle to reduce the cost of maintenance and improve performance in practice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still have to do a lot of research in the library .
When I hold a book in my hand , I wish I could just type in keywords to search for the sections I wanted , and be able to e-mail myself the content so I do n't have to lug these books around .
And I would return a book only to realize I still need a quick look .
What about a book in a foreign language that I wish could be translated on the fly , and maybe have my search term translated to that language to be searched ?
Library staff still spends a lot of time sorting and re-shelving books .
If a book is mis-shelved , you might as well consider it lost forever .
Books also need 24/7 air conditioning if you want to preserve them well.Electronic document might be more costly to maintain , but I think people should realize not all documents need to be kept on a live machine .
Most documents could be kept in offline media as long as we have an online index which is relatively small .
The most popular electronic documents will be online .
In effect , we make the offline media a part of the computer memory hierarchy , and apply locality principle to reduce the cost of maintenance and improve performance in practice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still have to do a lot of research in the library.
When I hold a book in my hand, I wish I could just type in keywords to search for the sections I wanted, and be able to e-mail myself the content so I don't have to lug these books around.
And I would return a book only to realize I still need a quick look.
What about a book in a foreign language that I wish could be translated on the fly, and maybe have my search term translated to that language to be searched?
Library staff still spends a lot of time sorting and re-shelving books.
If a book is mis-shelved, you might as well consider it lost forever.
Books also need 24/7 air conditioning if you want to preserve them well.Electronic document might be more costly to maintain, but I think people should realize not all documents need to be kept on a live machine.
Most documents could be kept in offline media as long as we have an online index which is relatively small.
The most popular electronic documents will be online.
In effect, we make the offline media a part of the computer memory hierarchy, and apply locality principle to reduce the cost of maintenance and improve performance in practice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560070</id>
	<title>Re:Try backup</title>
	<author>arose</author>
	<datestamp>1269165360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What does video storage have to do with a paperless office? Unless you are printing the individual frames on sheets of paper that is...</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does video storage have to do with a paperless office ?
Unless you are printing the individual frames on sheets of paper that is.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does video storage have to do with a paperless office?
Unless you are printing the individual frames on sheets of paper that is...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560266</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269166560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Never seen a Japanese toilet, eh? The better ones will wash and dry you. Infinitely superior to the old paper friction "cleaning" method.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Never seen a Japanese toilet , eh ?
The better ones will wash and dry you .
Infinitely superior to the old paper friction " cleaning " method .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never seen a Japanese toilet, eh?
The better ones will wash and dry you.
Infinitely superior to the old paper friction "cleaning" method.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559906</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>grcumb</author>
	<datestamp>1269164340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet. Some things would be impractical..."</p></div><p>You've obviously never been to France.</p><p>Okay, haha, yeah. But seriously, there really is More Than One Way To Do It in this case. The last time I installed a printer on my machine it was to print DVDs and their covers. With the exception of a few handouts (almost never my own), I never printer anything at all. I do have more screen space than many people and I keep a scan of my signature safely stored on my PC, but it really doesn't take much imagination to avoid most (mis)uses of paper.</p><p>I find paper cumbersome, difficult to keep organised and generally useless for more than 10 minutes.</p><p>There are, of course, a few very good reasons to file paper copies of documents. Contracts and other legal documents, for example, have somewhat more value as paper than their digital counterparts.</p><p>But something we forget is that, back when <em>everything</em> was on paper, we had these things called secretaries and filing clerks, people whose job it was to keep the paper organised. Scoff if you like about the uselessness of hiring people to do nothing more than cart paper around, but I can tell you that the majority of organisations don't give nearly enough thought to replacing them. </p><p>It's primarily this inefficiency -assuming that computers will replace secretaries <i>et alia</i> without giving a thought to replicating their functionality and the processes they followed- that led to the <em>increased</em> consumption of paper that most offices saw as computers arrived on the scene. People would print off multiple copies of emails etc. because they didn't know how to store and manage them.</p><p>Going paperless is a process more than a product. It's an administrative challenge more than a technical one. It's possible to get there, but you have to give it some thought and effort first. Lamentably few people and organisations have ever done this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet .
Some things would be impractical... " You 've obviously never been to France.Okay , haha , yeah .
But seriously , there really is More Than One Way To Do It in this case .
The last time I installed a printer on my machine it was to print DVDs and their covers .
With the exception of a few handouts ( almost never my own ) , I never printer anything at all .
I do have more screen space than many people and I keep a scan of my signature safely stored on my PC , but it really does n't take much imagination to avoid most ( mis ) uses of paper.I find paper cumbersome , difficult to keep organised and generally useless for more than 10 minutes.There are , of course , a few very good reasons to file paper copies of documents .
Contracts and other legal documents , for example , have somewhat more value as paper than their digital counterparts.But something we forget is that , back when everything was on paper , we had these things called secretaries and filing clerks , people whose job it was to keep the paper organised .
Scoff if you like about the uselessness of hiring people to do nothing more than cart paper around , but I can tell you that the majority of organisations do n't give nearly enough thought to replacing them .
It 's primarily this inefficiency -assuming that computers will replace secretaries et alia without giving a thought to replicating their functionality and the processes they followed- that led to the increased consumption of paper that most offices saw as computers arrived on the scene .
People would print off multiple copies of emails etc .
because they did n't know how to store and manage them.Going paperless is a process more than a product .
It 's an administrative challenge more than a technical one .
It 's possible to get there , but you have to give it some thought and effort first .
Lamentably few people and organisations have ever done this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A paperless office is as useful as a paperless toilet.
Some things would be impractical..."You've obviously never been to France.Okay, haha, yeah.
But seriously, there really is More Than One Way To Do It in this case.
The last time I installed a printer on my machine it was to print DVDs and their covers.
With the exception of a few handouts (almost never my own), I never printer anything at all.
I do have more screen space than many people and I keep a scan of my signature safely stored on my PC, but it really doesn't take much imagination to avoid most (mis)uses of paper.I find paper cumbersome, difficult to keep organised and generally useless for more than 10 minutes.There are, of course, a few very good reasons to file paper copies of documents.
Contracts and other legal documents, for example, have somewhat more value as paper than their digital counterparts.But something we forget is that, back when everything was on paper, we had these things called secretaries and filing clerks, people whose job it was to keep the paper organised.
Scoff if you like about the uselessness of hiring people to do nothing more than cart paper around, but I can tell you that the majority of organisations don't give nearly enough thought to replacing them.
It's primarily this inefficiency -assuming that computers will replace secretaries et alia without giving a thought to replicating their functionality and the processes they followed- that led to the increased consumption of paper that most offices saw as computers arrived on the scene.
People would print off multiple copies of emails etc.
because they didn't know how to store and manage them.Going paperless is a process more than a product.
It's an administrative challenge more than a technical one.
It's possible to get there, but you have to give it some thought and effort first.
Lamentably few people and organisations have ever done this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564898</id>
	<title>I got some dirty insight for you ;-)</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1269255600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Back in the 80s, I remember someone saying that a paperless office would be about as useful as the paperless toilet.</p></div><p>At least you know the guy advocating paperless toilets isn't full of shit<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in the 80s , I remember someone saying that a paperless office would be about as useful as the paperless toilet.At least you know the guy advocating paperless toilets is n't full of shit : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in the 80s, I remember someone saying that a paperless office would be about as useful as the paperless toilet.At least you know the guy advocating paperless toilets isn't full of shit :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562302</id>
	<title>Being Paperless</title>
	<author>jmrives</author>
	<datestamp>1269181260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work, for the most part, paperlessly. There are very few situations where I feel compelled to transfer something from the digital world to paper. In most cases, it is because I need to interact with another person who requires it. Those cases are coming less and less frequently. Now, to be fair, I am a software developer and I work with people who are -- for the most part -- comfortable sharing information digitally. But, I also have a side business as a property investor. For the most part, the people I deal with in that business are also quite willing to work digitally. There is the occasional person who can't seem to divorce them-self from their FAX machine and when it comes to signing documents, that tends to be the de facto mechanism. Now, once the lawyer gets involved (i.e. at the signing), everything becomes paper and understandably so. I think we will see the embracing of digital signatures. Its just not here yet -- at least not in a commonly accepted way.

OK, with that said.... I do still read paper books. I am keeping my eye on the e-reader market though. Its beginning to get interesting and I will probably buy into it very soon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work , for the most part , paperlessly .
There are very few situations where I feel compelled to transfer something from the digital world to paper .
In most cases , it is because I need to interact with another person who requires it .
Those cases are coming less and less frequently .
Now , to be fair , I am a software developer and I work with people who are -- for the most part -- comfortable sharing information digitally .
But , I also have a side business as a property investor .
For the most part , the people I deal with in that business are also quite willing to work digitally .
There is the occasional person who ca n't seem to divorce them-self from their FAX machine and when it comes to signing documents , that tends to be the de facto mechanism .
Now , once the lawyer gets involved ( i.e .
at the signing ) , everything becomes paper and understandably so .
I think we will see the embracing of digital signatures .
Its just not here yet -- at least not in a commonly accepted way .
OK , with that said.... I do still read paper books .
I am keeping my eye on the e-reader market though .
Its beginning to get interesting and I will probably buy into it very soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work, for the most part, paperlessly.
There are very few situations where I feel compelled to transfer something from the digital world to paper.
In most cases, it is because I need to interact with another person who requires it.
Those cases are coming less and less frequently.
Now, to be fair, I am a software developer and I work with people who are -- for the most part -- comfortable sharing information digitally.
But, I also have a side business as a property investor.
For the most part, the people I deal with in that business are also quite willing to work digitally.
There is the occasional person who can't seem to divorce them-self from their FAX machine and when it comes to signing documents, that tends to be the de facto mechanism.
Now, once the lawyer gets involved (i.e.
at the signing), everything becomes paper and understandably so.
I think we will see the embracing of digital signatures.
Its just not here yet -- at least not in a commonly accepted way.
OK, with that said.... I do still read paper books.
I am keeping my eye on the e-reader market though.
Its beginning to get interesting and I will probably buy into it very soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562782</id>
	<title>Re:Prices &amp; UI...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269185040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Paper is incredibly cheap...At ~1 cent per page, how many reams of paper would it take to pay off a single tablet/eBook reader for a single person? Answer: "Too many"...</p></div><p>Not once you start figuring in the cost of printer and copier toner and the maintenance and leasing of said equipment (often contracted). Suddenly that tablet/eBook has been paid off very quickly.</p><p>Since I haven't seen a Linux Desktop comment I'm going to slip one in. I've gone almost completely paperless in my own job. One of the big things helping that is the multiple desktops available in Gnome (and KDE). I can spread documents over as many desktops as I need with just a scroll of the mouse wheel needed to switch.</p><p>As mentioned however, there are still people who print out their e-mails. When I asked one why they didn't simply create a "To Do" folder and move the important e-mails into that until they handled them (and then moved them into the proper file folder) I received a very hostile "I don't know how to do that" response. It was clear as well that they didn't want to know.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper is incredibly cheap...At ~ 1 cent per page , how many reams of paper would it take to pay off a single tablet/eBook reader for a single person ?
Answer : " Too many " ...Not once you start figuring in the cost of printer and copier toner and the maintenance and leasing of said equipment ( often contracted ) .
Suddenly that tablet/eBook has been paid off very quickly.Since I have n't seen a Linux Desktop comment I 'm going to slip one in .
I 've gone almost completely paperless in my own job .
One of the big things helping that is the multiple desktops available in Gnome ( and KDE ) .
I can spread documents over as many desktops as I need with just a scroll of the mouse wheel needed to switch.As mentioned however , there are still people who print out their e-mails .
When I asked one why they did n't simply create a " To Do " folder and move the important e-mails into that until they handled them ( and then moved them into the proper file folder ) I received a very hostile " I do n't know how to do that " response .
It was clear as well that they did n't want to know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper is incredibly cheap...At ~1 cent per page, how many reams of paper would it take to pay off a single tablet/eBook reader for a single person?
Answer: "Too many"...Not once you start figuring in the cost of printer and copier toner and the maintenance and leasing of said equipment (often contracted).
Suddenly that tablet/eBook has been paid off very quickly.Since I haven't seen a Linux Desktop comment I'm going to slip one in.
I've gone almost completely paperless in my own job.
One of the big things helping that is the multiple desktops available in Gnome (and KDE).
I can spread documents over as many desktops as I need with just a scroll of the mouse wheel needed to switch.As mentioned however, there are still people who print out their e-mails.
When I asked one why they didn't simply create a "To Do" folder and move the important e-mails into that until they handled them (and then moved them into the proper file folder) I received a very hostile "I don't know how to do that" response.
It was clear as well that they didn't want to know.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560128</id>
	<title>Re:My office is paperless for years</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1269165780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how do you solved the problem of signatures on contracts? I mean signatures that are valid in court.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how do you solved the problem of signatures on contracts ?
I mean signatures that are valid in court .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how do you solved the problem of signatures on contracts?
I mean signatures that are valid in court.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561654</id>
	<title>Re:Workflow</title>
	<author>aaarrrgggh</author>
	<datestamp>1269176760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am an arc-e as well, and the office you describe sounds like a hold-over from the mid-90's. Our plotting load has dropped dramatically in the last 5-10 years, and now we end up using mostly 11x17s rather than 30x42s.</p><p>Where we kill trees is really reports, proposals, and specs, and a lot of the management workflow.</p><p>We don't go paperless because it is poor ROI, as parent suggests with CAD operators. Most of my markups are either for discussing the task, or done on the windows. Better collaboration software could reduce paper, but the time of a partner is what limits business growth, so sometimes you don't worry about paper waste.</p><p>The catalyst is location-independence. As this increases as a driver for business, there is less paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am an arc-e as well , and the office you describe sounds like a hold-over from the mid-90 's .
Our plotting load has dropped dramatically in the last 5-10 years , and now we end up using mostly 11x17s rather than 30x42s.Where we kill trees is really reports , proposals , and specs , and a lot of the management workflow.We do n't go paperless because it is poor ROI , as parent suggests with CAD operators .
Most of my markups are either for discussing the task , or done on the windows .
Better collaboration software could reduce paper , but the time of a partner is what limits business growth , so sometimes you do n't worry about paper waste.The catalyst is location-independence .
As this increases as a driver for business , there is less paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am an arc-e as well, and the office you describe sounds like a hold-over from the mid-90's.
Our plotting load has dropped dramatically in the last 5-10 years, and now we end up using mostly 11x17s rather than 30x42s.Where we kill trees is really reports, proposals, and specs, and a lot of the management workflow.We don't go paperless because it is poor ROI, as parent suggests with CAD operators.
Most of my markups are either for discussing the task, or done on the windows.
Better collaboration software could reduce paper, but the time of a partner is what limits business growth, so sometimes you don't worry about paper waste.The catalyst is location-independence.
As this increases as a driver for business, there is less paper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561310</id>
	<title>Apple's Spotlight Did it for Me.</title>
	<author>Hercules Peanut</author>
	<datestamp>1269174000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OK, I'm not totally paperless. My collegues keep giving me the stuff but I almost never print anythng out since I started really using spotlight. Suddenly it no longer matters where the dcument is, cmd-Space and the first few letters and there it is. "cmd-~" switches to the next document and expose lets me see everything. About the only thing I ever print out anymore are coupons and directions. I know, a slashdot reader with no GPS and a crappy smartphone phone...shameful. Give me a few more months to get out of my contract and I should be truly paperless.<br>
<br>
Apologies for sounding like a fanboy. I have a couple of friends who are similarly comfortable nigh paperless with their linux boxes. I really think the portablility is key. When sitting at your desk, computers these days do a pretty good job of eliminating the need for paper but what happens in the car? What happens when you want to show it off to someone who isn't armed with a really nice handheld or tablet, like me:(  ?<br>
<br>
Another problem is file sharing. Where do you put stuff to share with others? The network drive? Many people with whom I work are not employed by my organization so they can't get to the network. Google Docs is great but not everyone uses it and many are not comfortable having been asimilated by MS Office. <br>
<br>
The technology is there. We just aren't comfortable with it yet. We will be though and it will be very soon. I thank Google, Facebook and the iPhone for bringing the necessary technologies to the mainstream. No, not being a fanboy this time. It's about the non-geek impact here. Facebook gave us a tool to easily and COMFORTABLY create information and share online. GoogleDocs gave us the power to collaborate with anyone and while there were plenty of smartphones before the iPhone and there are still plenty with more fuctionality, the iPhone put the smartphone is the hands of the non-geek and got them excited about it too!<br>
<br>
Enough, I need some cookies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , I 'm not totally paperless .
My collegues keep giving me the stuff but I almost never print anythng out since I started really using spotlight .
Suddenly it no longer matters where the dcument is , cmd-Space and the first few letters and there it is .
" cmd- ~ " switches to the next document and expose lets me see everything .
About the only thing I ever print out anymore are coupons and directions .
I know , a slashdot reader with no GPS and a crappy smartphone phone...shameful .
Give me a few more months to get out of my contract and I should be truly paperless .
Apologies for sounding like a fanboy .
I have a couple of friends who are similarly comfortable nigh paperless with their linux boxes .
I really think the portablility is key .
When sitting at your desk , computers these days do a pretty good job of eliminating the need for paper but what happens in the car ?
What happens when you want to show it off to someone who is n't armed with a really nice handheld or tablet , like me : ( ?
Another problem is file sharing .
Where do you put stuff to share with others ?
The network drive ?
Many people with whom I work are not employed by my organization so they ca n't get to the network .
Google Docs is great but not everyone uses it and many are not comfortable having been asimilated by MS Office .
The technology is there .
We just are n't comfortable with it yet .
We will be though and it will be very soon .
I thank Google , Facebook and the iPhone for bringing the necessary technologies to the mainstream .
No , not being a fanboy this time .
It 's about the non-geek impact here .
Facebook gave us a tool to easily and COMFORTABLY create information and share online .
GoogleDocs gave us the power to collaborate with anyone and while there were plenty of smartphones before the iPhone and there are still plenty with more fuctionality , the iPhone put the smartphone is the hands of the non-geek and got them excited about it too !
Enough , I need some cookies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, I'm not totally paperless.
My collegues keep giving me the stuff but I almost never print anythng out since I started really using spotlight.
Suddenly it no longer matters where the dcument is, cmd-Space and the first few letters and there it is.
"cmd-~" switches to the next document and expose lets me see everything.
About the only thing I ever print out anymore are coupons and directions.
I know, a slashdot reader with no GPS and a crappy smartphone phone...shameful.
Give me a few more months to get out of my contract and I should be truly paperless.
Apologies for sounding like a fanboy.
I have a couple of friends who are similarly comfortable nigh paperless with their linux boxes.
I really think the portablility is key.
When sitting at your desk, computers these days do a pretty good job of eliminating the need for paper but what happens in the car?
What happens when you want to show it off to someone who isn't armed with a really nice handheld or tablet, like me:(  ?
Another problem is file sharing.
Where do you put stuff to share with others?
The network drive?
Many people with whom I work are not employed by my organization so they can't get to the network.
Google Docs is great but not everyone uses it and many are not comfortable having been asimilated by MS Office.
The technology is there.
We just aren't comfortable with it yet.
We will be though and it will be very soon.
I thank Google, Facebook and the iPhone for bringing the necessary technologies to the mainstream.
No, not being a fanboy this time.
It's about the non-geek impact here.
Facebook gave us a tool to easily and COMFORTABLY create information and share online.
GoogleDocs gave us the power to collaborate with anyone and while there were plenty of smartphones before the iPhone and there are still plenty with more fuctionality, the iPhone put the smartphone is the hands of the non-geek and got them excited about it too!
Enough, I need some cookies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564656</id>
	<title>bureaucratic management</title>
	<author>sashang</author>
	<datestamp>1269251340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Management that requires me print out a timesheet in from excel and then get it printed and signed then I scan the signed document and email it to the appropriate people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Management that requires me print out a timesheet in from excel and then get it printed and signed then I scan the signed document and email it to the appropriate people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Management that requires me print out a timesheet in from excel and then get it printed and signed then I scan the signed document and email it to the appropriate people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559296</id>
	<title>Display size</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269203220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; the main thing keeping me printing out documents is the ability to spread a dozen pages of a document under review out on my table and marking it up by hand.</p><p>So, in short, the paperless office is waiting on bigger displays. Sounds about right to me...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; the main thing keeping me printing out documents is the ability to spread a dozen pages of a document under review out on my table and marking it up by hand.So , in short , the paperless office is waiting on bigger displays .
Sounds about right to me.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; the main thing keeping me printing out documents is the ability to spread a dozen pages of a document under review out on my table and marking it up by hand.So, in short, the paperless office is waiting on bigger displays.
Sounds about right to me...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565276</id>
	<title>re: paperless</title>
	<author>dougarz</author>
	<datestamp>1269261540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>paper folds up, slides in my pocket and is thin enough that it does not ruin my fashion statement. It can be stored and still be
useable/accessible centuries from now. It can be "thoroughly" disposed of by burning or via a good shredder. Now lets, talk about the the longevity of harddive/memory devices............and total disposal.</htmltext>
<tokenext>paper folds up , slides in my pocket and is thin enough that it does not ruin my fashion statement .
It can be stored and still be useable/accessible centuries from now .
It can be " thoroughly " disposed of by burning or via a good shredder .
Now lets , talk about the the longevity of harddive/memory devices............and total disposal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>paper folds up, slides in my pocket and is thin enough that it does not ruin my fashion statement.
It can be stored and still be
useable/accessible centuries from now.
It can be "thoroughly" disposed of by burning or via a good shredder.
Now lets, talk about the the longevity of harddive/memory devices............and total disposal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559622</id>
	<title>A reader</title>
	<author>Ernesto Alvarez</author>
	<datestamp>1269162360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I need is a nice, cheap, rugged and handy document reader.</p><p>Seriously, the number one reason I print documents is because I want to review them while I go to the loo, or because I want to grab something to eat and I'll read it while I wait or because I want to take the doc home and maybe read it while I ride the bus.</p><p>Basically it boils down to something:</p><ol><li>Cheap (if it breaks, I don't want to care too much about it)</li><li>Rugged (I'm taking it with me on a possibly crowded bus)</li><li>Standards compliant(I want to read a fucking PDF, that's all)</li><li>No bells and whistles (no wireless, colour, whatever except for a standards compliant interface)</li><li>Not a general purpose computer (read PDF, nothing more)</li><li>Good battery life (I want it to last at least a week on two AAA NiMH cells, and no custom cells, see point 3)</li><li>Did I mention cheap? (I mean it, USD 10 would be all right, might sacrifice cheap for rugged, but not for cpu power)</li></ol><p>Basically, stick some memory, an ARM processor, a PDF decoder and a screen. In fact, forget about most of the memory, just some RAM and a SD connector as an interface, user pays for the memory card.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I need is a nice , cheap , rugged and handy document reader.Seriously , the number one reason I print documents is because I want to review them while I go to the loo , or because I want to grab something to eat and I 'll read it while I wait or because I want to take the doc home and maybe read it while I ride the bus.Basically it boils down to something : Cheap ( if it breaks , I do n't want to care too much about it ) Rugged ( I 'm taking it with me on a possibly crowded bus ) Standards compliant ( I want to read a fucking PDF , that 's all ) No bells and whistles ( no wireless , colour , whatever except for a standards compliant interface ) Not a general purpose computer ( read PDF , nothing more ) Good battery life ( I want it to last at least a week on two AAA NiMH cells , and no custom cells , see point 3 ) Did I mention cheap ?
( I mean it , USD 10 would be all right , might sacrifice cheap for rugged , but not for cpu power ) Basically , stick some memory , an ARM processor , a PDF decoder and a screen .
In fact , forget about most of the memory , just some RAM and a SD connector as an interface , user pays for the memory card .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I need is a nice, cheap, rugged and handy document reader.Seriously, the number one reason I print documents is because I want to review them while I go to the loo, or because I want to grab something to eat and I'll read it while I wait or because I want to take the doc home and maybe read it while I ride the bus.Basically it boils down to something:Cheap (if it breaks, I don't want to care too much about it)Rugged (I'm taking it with me on a possibly crowded bus)Standards compliant(I want to read a fucking PDF, that's all)No bells and whistles (no wireless, colour, whatever except for a standards compliant interface)Not a general purpose computer (read PDF, nothing more)Good battery life (I want it to last at least a week on two AAA NiMH cells, and no custom cells, see point 3)Did I mention cheap?
(I mean it, USD 10 would be all right, might sacrifice cheap for rugged, but not for cpu power)Basically, stick some memory, an ARM processor, a PDF decoder and a screen.
In fact, forget about most of the memory, just some RAM and a SD connector as an interface, user pays for the memory card.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559306</id>
	<title>Comfort</title>
	<author>SkydiverFL</author>
	<datestamp>1269203280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's kinda like wiping or eating with your other hand.  For our office, it boils down to comfort.  We spend our entire lives reading books, flipping through newspapers, preparing reports and homework, signing contracts, etc., etc., etc.  We are conditioned to have something tangible in our hands.  So, when it comes to reading a 50-page document on an LCD screen, it feels unnatural.  We can do it if we had to, but our brain simply feels awkward accepting it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's kinda like wiping or eating with your other hand .
For our office , it boils down to comfort .
We spend our entire lives reading books , flipping through newspapers , preparing reports and homework , signing contracts , etc. , etc. , etc .
We are conditioned to have something tangible in our hands .
So , when it comes to reading a 50-page document on an LCD screen , it feels unnatural .
We can do it if we had to , but our brain simply feels awkward accepting it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's kinda like wiping or eating with your other hand.
For our office, it boils down to comfort.
We spend our entire lives reading books, flipping through newspapers, preparing reports and homework, signing contracts, etc., etc., etc.
We are conditioned to have something tangible in our hands.
So, when it comes to reading a 50-page document on an LCD screen, it feels unnatural.
We can do it if we had to, but our brain simply feels awkward accepting it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31572248</id>
	<title>Existing Infrastructure, Money, and Confidence</title>
	<author>Zotdogg</author>
	<datestamp>1269283980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My "two cents" is that the primary barriers to a fully paperless office are the existing business\office infrastructure, the cost of paperless technologies, and confidence in the paperless technologies.<br>
<br>
<i>Existing Infrustructure</i> <br>
Though the cost of upgrading the infrastructure might be a part of the barrier existing infrastructure poses, I think the primary effect it produces is a barrier to the transition to paperless. Even if all the costs were covered for a transition to paperless, the existing infrastructure present in (what I would guess to be &gt;90\% of) companies was assembled in, around, and to support the use of paper. Just as there is another<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. article today that talks about how the OS model needs to be re-evaluated\designed, the way common business practices take place may need to be rethought with regards to the pros and cons that paperless technology offer and have new infrastructure designed\built around them.<br>
<br>
<i>Money</i> <br>
Assuming the infrastructure was ready to facilitate the transition to paperless, the cost of the new paperless technologies would have be addressed\covered. These costs are likely to be significant when providing the necessary technologies to replace everyday use\representation of paper in a way that would encourage the users not to go buy a printer, pads and boxes of pens on their own. It may be tempting to just buy another monitor for those with one or large monitors for "more demanding" use. Unfortunately, while this addresses the visual aspect of data usage, it does nothing to replicate the "tactile data manipulation" present in the use of paper and writing utensils. Just to drive this point home, the most natural paperless arrangement I've seen has been in movies (no, not the super-cool-glove-with-dots-on-the-fingers-projection-on-glass-wall-computer(s) from Minority Report - that tech was pretty cool but seemed more cool than useful). The paperless setup that I've seen and like the best is in "The Island" in the bad-guy's office. He had an office that was concrete, metal and glass that could electronically transition from clear to frosted\opaque (tech that already exists). He had no computer on his desk. Hardly anything in his office. What he did have was a desk with a frosted\clear glass pane for the desktop surface. Of course you probably already know\guessed that the computing environment was projected on that frosted glass but what I thought was the unique part was that he had a couple objects sitting on his desk that interacted with it. The two objects (at least that were used and I remember) were a "hand sized" metal pyramid and a metal pen\stylus. The pen stylus was used for all the things you might imagine (pointing, clicking, drawing) and the pyramid was used more as a control object that would do more functional things like move windows, change modes of windows, and if I guess: Performed things like power on\off, volume control, brightness control....and so on.<br>
That setup seemed to provide the most ergonomic "paper replacing" computing environment that I've seen but it WAS built in an evil lair and, from what I gather, those aren't known to be cheap.<br>
<br>
<i>Confidence</i> <br>
Assuming that an office\company was able to prepare their business infrastructure for the transition and they could afford it, they would then be faced with what I see to be the last hurdle of convincing EVERYONE in the office to use it for ALL processes for which they might have previously used paper. This would probably take the form of more resiliant and internally publicized backup systems. Users would need ultimate confidence that their document isn't going to evaporate in to the ether under ANY circumstance at ANY time (kinda like a piece of paper). Sure, if the building burns down paper would be gone, so maybe you can slide on that one but, that is where a RESILIENT backup system that had one of the pillars of data backup in place (Off-Site Backups) would prove beneficial. One usb hard drive plugged in to your server with a scheduled batch file to copy data is not going to cut it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My " two cents " is that the primary barriers to a fully paperless office are the existing business \ office infrastructure , the cost of paperless technologies , and confidence in the paperless technologies .
Existing Infrustructure Though the cost of upgrading the infrastructure might be a part of the barrier existing infrastructure poses , I think the primary effect it produces is a barrier to the transition to paperless .
Even if all the costs were covered for a transition to paperless , the existing infrastructure present in ( what I would guess to be &gt; 90 \ % of ) companies was assembled in , around , and to support the use of paper .
Just as there is another / .
article today that talks about how the OS model needs to be re-evaluated \ designed , the way common business practices take place may need to be rethought with regards to the pros and cons that paperless technology offer and have new infrastructure designed \ built around them .
Money Assuming the infrastructure was ready to facilitate the transition to paperless , the cost of the new paperless technologies would have be addressed \ covered .
These costs are likely to be significant when providing the necessary technologies to replace everyday use \ representation of paper in a way that would encourage the users not to go buy a printer , pads and boxes of pens on their own .
It may be tempting to just buy another monitor for those with one or large monitors for " more demanding " use .
Unfortunately , while this addresses the visual aspect of data usage , it does nothing to replicate the " tactile data manipulation " present in the use of paper and writing utensils .
Just to drive this point home , the most natural paperless arrangement I 've seen has been in movies ( no , not the super-cool-glove-with-dots-on-the-fingers-projection-on-glass-wall-computer ( s ) from Minority Report - that tech was pretty cool but seemed more cool than useful ) .
The paperless setup that I 've seen and like the best is in " The Island " in the bad-guy 's office .
He had an office that was concrete , metal and glass that could electronically transition from clear to frosted \ opaque ( tech that already exists ) .
He had no computer on his desk .
Hardly anything in his office .
What he did have was a desk with a frosted \ clear glass pane for the desktop surface .
Of course you probably already know \ guessed that the computing environment was projected on that frosted glass but what I thought was the unique part was that he had a couple objects sitting on his desk that interacted with it .
The two objects ( at least that were used and I remember ) were a " hand sized " metal pyramid and a metal pen \ stylus .
The pen stylus was used for all the things you might imagine ( pointing , clicking , drawing ) and the pyramid was used more as a control object that would do more functional things like move windows , change modes of windows , and if I guess : Performed things like power on \ off , volume control , brightness control....and so on .
That setup seemed to provide the most ergonomic " paper replacing " computing environment that I 've seen but it WAS built in an evil lair and , from what I gather , those are n't known to be cheap .
Confidence Assuming that an office \ company was able to prepare their business infrastructure for the transition and they could afford it , they would then be faced with what I see to be the last hurdle of convincing EVERYONE in the office to use it for ALL processes for which they might have previously used paper .
This would probably take the form of more resiliant and internally publicized backup systems .
Users would need ultimate confidence that their document is n't going to evaporate in to the ether under ANY circumstance at ANY time ( kinda like a piece of paper ) .
Sure , if the building burns down paper would be gone , so maybe you can slide on that one but , that is where a RESILIENT backup system that had one of the pillars of data backup in place ( Off-Site Backups ) would prove beneficial .
One usb hard drive plugged in to your server with a scheduled batch file to copy data is not going to cut it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My "two cents" is that the primary barriers to a fully paperless office are the existing business\office infrastructure, the cost of paperless technologies, and confidence in the paperless technologies.
Existing Infrustructure 
Though the cost of upgrading the infrastructure might be a part of the barrier existing infrastructure poses, I think the primary effect it produces is a barrier to the transition to paperless.
Even if all the costs were covered for a transition to paperless, the existing infrastructure present in (what I would guess to be &gt;90\% of) companies was assembled in, around, and to support the use of paper.
Just as there is another /.
article today that talks about how the OS model needs to be re-evaluated\designed, the way common business practices take place may need to be rethought with regards to the pros and cons that paperless technology offer and have new infrastructure designed\built around them.
Money 
Assuming the infrastructure was ready to facilitate the transition to paperless, the cost of the new paperless technologies would have be addressed\covered.
These costs are likely to be significant when providing the necessary technologies to replace everyday use\representation of paper in a way that would encourage the users not to go buy a printer, pads and boxes of pens on their own.
It may be tempting to just buy another monitor for those with one or large monitors for "more demanding" use.
Unfortunately, while this addresses the visual aspect of data usage, it does nothing to replicate the "tactile data manipulation" present in the use of paper and writing utensils.
Just to drive this point home, the most natural paperless arrangement I've seen has been in movies (no, not the super-cool-glove-with-dots-on-the-fingers-projection-on-glass-wall-computer(s) from Minority Report - that tech was pretty cool but seemed more cool than useful).
The paperless setup that I've seen and like the best is in "The Island" in the bad-guy's office.
He had an office that was concrete, metal and glass that could electronically transition from clear to frosted\opaque (tech that already exists).
He had no computer on his desk.
Hardly anything in his office.
What he did have was a desk with a frosted\clear glass pane for the desktop surface.
Of course you probably already know\guessed that the computing environment was projected on that frosted glass but what I thought was the unique part was that he had a couple objects sitting on his desk that interacted with it.
The two objects (at least that were used and I remember) were a "hand sized" metal pyramid and a metal pen\stylus.
The pen stylus was used for all the things you might imagine (pointing, clicking, drawing) and the pyramid was used more as a control object that would do more functional things like move windows, change modes of windows, and if I guess: Performed things like power on\off, volume control, brightness control....and so on.
That setup seemed to provide the most ergonomic "paper replacing" computing environment that I've seen but it WAS built in an evil lair and, from what I gather, those aren't known to be cheap.
Confidence 
Assuming that an office\company was able to prepare their business infrastructure for the transition and they could afford it, they would then be faced with what I see to be the last hurdle of convincing EVERYONE in the office to use it for ALL processes for which they might have previously used paper.
This would probably take the form of more resiliant and internally publicized backup systems.
Users would need ultimate confidence that their document isn't going to evaporate in to the ether under ANY circumstance at ANY time (kinda like a piece of paper).
Sure, if the building burns down paper would be gone, so maybe you can slide on that one but, that is where a RESILIENT backup system that had one of the pillars of data backup in place (Off-Site Backups) would prove beneficial.
One usb hard drive plugged in to your server with a scheduled batch file to copy data is not going to cut it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559478</id>
	<title>Proof Reading</title>
	<author>Flere Imsaho</author>
	<datestamp>1269204540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to me that no matter how much I spell and grammar check the crap out of something on my screen, as soon as I read hard copy I find mistooks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me that no matter how much I spell and grammar check the crap out of something on my screen , as soon as I read hard copy I find mistooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me that no matter how much I spell and grammar check the crap out of something on my screen, as soon as I read hard copy I find mistooks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560634</id>
	<title>RELIABILITY</title>
	<author>vonkas</author>
	<datestamp>1269169080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RELIABILITY &amp; RELIABILITY. The tangible quality of something which exists in the real universe beats the elusive bits. I think the community of IT engineers is to blame here - we need to do a better job. Especially software is far too dodgy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RELIABILITY &amp; RELIABILITY .
The tangible quality of something which exists in the real universe beats the elusive bits .
I think the community of IT engineers is to blame here - we need to do a better job .
Especially software is far too dodgy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RELIABILITY &amp; RELIABILITY.
The tangible quality of something which exists in the real universe beats the elusive bits.
I think the community of IT engineers is to blame here - we need to do a better job.
Especially software is far too dodgy!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31573058</id>
	<title>We live in a physical world</title>
	<author>darkvizier</author>
	<datestamp>1269286860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our brains like to map things in a model similar to that which we already know.  I can write on a piece of paper, I can doodle.  I can draw arbitrary lines and shapes wherever I choose, and I can put it in a physical space on my desk which isn't limited to my screen real estate.  It is real to me, in a way that a window on my desktop is not.  It follows laws of physics.  The matter will not be destroyed if my machine reboots and I forget to click save.<br> <br>
Because our computer applications do not follow the same laws as our physical world, we can't think about them in the same way.  In many cases we don't need to.  There are advantages of course to not being restrained to the laws of the physical world.  We can make copies of our data, we can apply different templates and formatting to it without rewriting the content.<br> <br>
Can we create technologies which carry both the benefits of the digital world and the solidity and predictability, and reliability of the physical world?  I think this is possible, but it requires a much greater discipline than we normally apply to our product design.  It requires that intuitive workflows be established and well supported, and that the interface itself have parallels to our experience of the physical world.  It requires a lot of thinking about what we do and how and why.  We just don't hold ourselves to very high standards in this regard.  We are lazy.  And we are unimaginative about the ideal role of technology.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our brains like to map things in a model similar to that which we already know .
I can write on a piece of paper , I can doodle .
I can draw arbitrary lines and shapes wherever I choose , and I can put it in a physical space on my desk which is n't limited to my screen real estate .
It is real to me , in a way that a window on my desktop is not .
It follows laws of physics .
The matter will not be destroyed if my machine reboots and I forget to click save .
Because our computer applications do not follow the same laws as our physical world , we ca n't think about them in the same way .
In many cases we do n't need to .
There are advantages of course to not being restrained to the laws of the physical world .
We can make copies of our data , we can apply different templates and formatting to it without rewriting the content .
Can we create technologies which carry both the benefits of the digital world and the solidity and predictability , and reliability of the physical world ?
I think this is possible , but it requires a much greater discipline than we normally apply to our product design .
It requires that intuitive workflows be established and well supported , and that the interface itself have parallels to our experience of the physical world .
It requires a lot of thinking about what we do and how and why .
We just do n't hold ourselves to very high standards in this regard .
We are lazy .
And we are unimaginative about the ideal role of technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our brains like to map things in a model similar to that which we already know.
I can write on a piece of paper, I can doodle.
I can draw arbitrary lines and shapes wherever I choose, and I can put it in a physical space on my desk which isn't limited to my screen real estate.
It is real to me, in a way that a window on my desktop is not.
It follows laws of physics.
The matter will not be destroyed if my machine reboots and I forget to click save.
Because our computer applications do not follow the same laws as our physical world, we can't think about them in the same way.
In many cases we don't need to.
There are advantages of course to not being restrained to the laws of the physical world.
We can make copies of our data, we can apply different templates and formatting to it without rewriting the content.
Can we create technologies which carry both the benefits of the digital world and the solidity and predictability, and reliability of the physical world?
I think this is possible, but it requires a much greater discipline than we normally apply to our product design.
It requires that intuitive workflows be established and well supported, and that the interface itself have parallels to our experience of the physical world.
It requires a lot of thinking about what we do and how and why.
We just don't hold ourselves to very high standards in this regard.
We are lazy.
And we are unimaginative about the ideal role of technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560552</id>
	<title>Re:A couple of things</title>
	<author>CortoMaltese</author>
	<datestamp>1269168540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Some of the reasons I still use paper:</p></div><p>Some counterarguments, if you don't mind!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Off-line use. I can refer to paper copies and make notes on them even when I'm not around the computer.</p></div><p>This is actually a pretty good reason. Making notes on paper is pretty handy.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Audit trail. Most document-management systems and e-mail systems have document retention policies that're under someone else's control. Sometimes I need to control copies of the documents independently of company policies (eg. anything related to HR, records that might prove inconvenient for management later (like my detailing of exactly why something they want to do is a Bad Idea), etc.).</p></div><p>I might not fully understand you here, but I don't really see why you couldn't accomplish this without making paper copies.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Change control. Many times documents can be changed in the computer and, while it records that there was a change, there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change. The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that <i>was</i> what was originally specified.</p></div><p>What is wrong with just saving a copy someplace else?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Space. My desk's a lot bigger than the computer monitor, and I can lay out a lot more papers and diagrams on it than I can have visible on the monitor at one time. Very useful, that.</p></div><p>Get a big monitor. They're cheap these days. Use virtual desktops. That way you can handle much more than the desk ever could. And you can easily switch between cluttered virtual desktops, unlike real ones.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Reliability. I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going <i>*poof*</i> when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.</p></div><p>You know, if my house went down with flames, I'd still have plenty of data around. It'd be all the physical things that I'd lose.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of the reasons I still use paper : Some counterarguments , if you do n't mind !
; ) Off-line use .
I can refer to paper copies and make notes on them even when I 'm not around the computer.This is actually a pretty good reason .
Making notes on paper is pretty handy.Audit trail .
Most document-management systems and e-mail systems have document retention policies that 're under someone else 's control .
Sometimes I need to control copies of the documents independently of company policies ( eg .
anything related to HR , records that might prove inconvenient for management later ( like my detailing of exactly why something they want to do is a Bad Idea ) , etc .
) .I might not fully understand you here , but I do n't really see why you could n't accomplish this without making paper copies.Change control .
Many times documents can be changed in the computer and , while it records that there was a change , there 's no record anymore of what the document said before the change .
The paper copies in my drawer ca n't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified.What is wrong with just saving a copy someplace else ? Space .
My desk 's a lot bigger than the computer monitor , and I can lay out a lot more papers and diagrams on it than I can have visible on the monitor at one time .
Very useful , that.Get a big monitor .
They 're cheap these days .
Use virtual desktops .
That way you can handle much more than the desk ever could .
And you can easily switch between cluttered virtual desktops , unlike real ones.Reliability .
I do n't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going * poof * when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT ca n't afford to do.You know , if my house went down with flames , I 'd still have plenty of data around .
It 'd be all the physical things that I 'd lose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of the reasons I still use paper:Some counterarguments, if you don't mind!
;)Off-line use.
I can refer to paper copies and make notes on them even when I'm not around the computer.This is actually a pretty good reason.
Making notes on paper is pretty handy.Audit trail.
Most document-management systems and e-mail systems have document retention policies that're under someone else's control.
Sometimes I need to control copies of the documents independently of company policies (eg.
anything related to HR, records that might prove inconvenient for management later (like my detailing of exactly why something they want to do is a Bad Idea), etc.
).I might not fully understand you here, but I don't really see why you couldn't accomplish this without making paper copies.Change control.
Many times documents can be changed in the computer and, while it records that there was a change, there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change.
The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified.What is wrong with just saving a copy someplace else?Space.
My desk's a lot bigger than the computer monitor, and I can lay out a lot more papers and diagrams on it than I can have visible on the monitor at one time.
Very useful, that.Get a big monitor.
They're cheap these days.
Use virtual desktops.
That way you can handle much more than the desk ever could.
And you can easily switch between cluttered virtual desktops, unlike real ones.Reliability.
I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going *poof* when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.You know, if my house went down with flames, I'd still have plenty of data around.
It'd be all the physical things that I'd lose.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559820</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>darkpixel2k</author>
	<datestamp>1269163680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Humans...  We like to have a piece of paper in our hands, we can easily hand it to a coworker, we can scribble on it to take notes.  I know it sounds oldskool, but for many tasks, a piece of paper is just superior.</p></div><p>
Exactly.  Until someone can come up with something like a tablet or the Star Trek PADD that costs a few bucks to make, is disposable, and can be handed around like paper, the paperless office won't happen.<br>
<br>
If the Apple iPad or whatever it's called cost $0.01 to purchase, and everyone had hundreds of them, they wouldn't feel bad about loading a document on it and passing it off to a coworker to tweak and change and then hand back.<br>
<br>
Currently there is nothing better than paper in terms of price and ease of use.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans... We like to have a piece of paper in our hands , we can easily hand it to a coworker , we can scribble on it to take notes .
I know it sounds oldskool , but for many tasks , a piece of paper is just superior .
Exactly. Until someone can come up with something like a tablet or the Star Trek PADD that costs a few bucks to make , is disposable , and can be handed around like paper , the paperless office wo n't happen .
If the Apple iPad or whatever it 's called cost $ 0.01 to purchase , and everyone had hundreds of them , they would n't feel bad about loading a document on it and passing it off to a coworker to tweak and change and then hand back .
Currently there is nothing better than paper in terms of price and ease of use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans...  We like to have a piece of paper in our hands, we can easily hand it to a coworker, we can scribble on it to take notes.
I know it sounds oldskool, but for many tasks, a piece of paper is just superior.
Exactly.  Until someone can come up with something like a tablet or the Star Trek PADD that costs a few bucks to make, is disposable, and can be handed around like paper, the paperless office won't happen.
If the Apple iPad or whatever it's called cost $0.01 to purchase, and everyone had hundreds of them, they wouldn't feel bad about loading a document on it and passing it off to a coworker to tweak and change and then hand back.
Currently there is nothing better than paper in terms of price and ease of use.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565530</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269264300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is the issue in my universe. Simple reliability. If I drop my planner or coffee get spilled on my desk the information still exists and is accessible (although messy). I tried to be paperless for years but the occasional (expensive) glitch made it unwise. Its fine if you exist tied to a desk but if you have to be at all mobile the problems multiply. And reading a laptop screen outside during the day?</p><p>Oh, I still dream about being able to move the current issues of my electronic subscriptions to something I can take down to the dock to read on a nice Spring morning. But that is beyond the basic issue of reliability -- if it is business info then it must be pretty glitch-proof and so far only paper has done that reliably.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is the issue in my universe .
Simple reliability .
If I drop my planner or coffee get spilled on my desk the information still exists and is accessible ( although messy ) .
I tried to be paperless for years but the occasional ( expensive ) glitch made it unwise .
Its fine if you exist tied to a desk but if you have to be at all mobile the problems multiply .
And reading a laptop screen outside during the day ? Oh , I still dream about being able to move the current issues of my electronic subscriptions to something I can take down to the dock to read on a nice Spring morning .
But that is beyond the basic issue of reliability -- if it is business info then it must be pretty glitch-proof and so far only paper has done that reliably .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is the issue in my universe.
Simple reliability.
If I drop my planner or coffee get spilled on my desk the information still exists and is accessible (although messy).
I tried to be paperless for years but the occasional (expensive) glitch made it unwise.
Its fine if you exist tied to a desk but if you have to be at all mobile the problems multiply.
And reading a laptop screen outside during the day?Oh, I still dream about being able to move the current issues of my electronic subscriptions to something I can take down to the dock to read on a nice Spring morning.
But that is beyond the basic issue of reliability -- if it is business info then it must be pretty glitch-proof and so far only paper has done that reliably.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560908</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>greg\_barton</author>
	<datestamp>1269170880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Romans also used lead cups.  Worked fine for them!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Romans also used lead cups .
Worked fine for them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Romans also used lead cups.
Worked fine for them!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560204</id>
	<title>The implementing memo ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1269166200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... is buried in an in-basket somewhere.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... is buried in an in-basket somewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... is buried in an in-basket somewhere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560284</id>
	<title>Code reading / cleaning</title>
	<author>mrjb</author>
	<datestamp>1269166680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If a fellow developer has written a 500+ line function that I need to maintain, I might print it out, stick the pages together, hang said function on the wall and use a marker to identify functional blocks in there. I find this helps a lot in understanding/cleaning up their code, especially when they nest IF statements and have the ELSE to an IF five pages later. I find it very impractical to work with such code on the limited size of a screen. Anyone know of a good multi-column code editor that can show 2 or 3 pages of code side by side? With our widescreen monitors nowadays, why not benefit that extra width?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If a fellow developer has written a 500 + line function that I need to maintain , I might print it out , stick the pages together , hang said function on the wall and use a marker to identify functional blocks in there .
I find this helps a lot in understanding/cleaning up their code , especially when they nest IF statements and have the ELSE to an IF five pages later .
I find it very impractical to work with such code on the limited size of a screen .
Anyone know of a good multi-column code editor that can show 2 or 3 pages of code side by side ?
With our widescreen monitors nowadays , why not benefit that extra width ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a fellow developer has written a 500+ line function that I need to maintain, I might print it out, stick the pages together, hang said function on the wall and use a marker to identify functional blocks in there.
I find this helps a lot in understanding/cleaning up their code, especially when they nest IF statements and have the ELSE to an IF five pages later.
I find it very impractical to work with such code on the limited size of a screen.
Anyone know of a good multi-column code editor that can show 2 or 3 pages of code side by side?
With our widescreen monitors nowadays, why not benefit that extra width?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559630</id>
	<title>displays and ... paper</title>
	<author>Thad Zurich</author>
	<datestamp>1269162420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>1) Limited display surfaces. Computers tend to treat all displays as if they need realtime updates. An HDTV large-screen desk display that updates slowly can handle vast display requirements without taxing computer hardware, which is cheap anyway.

2) Paper. Incoming paper still has to be dealt with. Scanning does not imply OCR, does not imply search.</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Limited display surfaces .
Computers tend to treat all displays as if they need realtime updates .
An HDTV large-screen desk display that updates slowly can handle vast display requirements without taxing computer hardware , which is cheap anyway .
2 ) Paper .
Incoming paper still has to be dealt with .
Scanning does not imply OCR , does not imply search .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Limited display surfaces.
Computers tend to treat all displays as if they need realtime updates.
An HDTV large-screen desk display that updates slowly can handle vast display requirements without taxing computer hardware, which is cheap anyway.
2) Paper.
Incoming paper still has to be dealt with.
Scanning does not imply OCR, does not imply search.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it. Contrast that to Windows.</p></div><p>I must be running a "different" Windows than everyone else here. My Windows install has never crashed and lost my document. Indeed, it's never crashed on me at all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never had my desk crash , losing all pieces of paper on it .
Contrast that to Windows.I must be running a " different " Windows than everyone else here .
My Windows install has never crashed and lost my document .
Indeed , it 's never crashed on me at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never had my desk crash, losing all pieces of paper on it.
Contrast that to Windows.I must be running a "different" Windows than everyone else here.
My Windows install has never crashed and lost my document.
Indeed, it's never crashed on me at all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31585102</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269364920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just use the three shells.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just use the three shells .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just use the three shells.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563994</id>
	<title>I'm working on it...</title>
	<author>Samarian Hillbilly</author>
	<datestamp>1269196980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think if I keep re-printing this 100 page word document every time I change a letter I'll eventually run out of paper...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think if I keep re-printing this 100 page word document every time I change a letter I 'll eventually run out of paper.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think if I keep re-printing this 100 page word document every time I change a letter I'll eventually run out of paper...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561260</id>
	<title>Re:Old saying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269173340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I think the people saying it's human-nature to want paper are the same who would be uncomfortable with a bidet.</p><p>I have a paperless office, and have had for years. I scanned my old papers for archival, and stopped flow of new ones. I do not own a printer.</p><p>I also don't use toilet paper, and haven't for years. I find water to be superior for cleaning, and it's one less thing to shop for.</p><p>The drawbacks are, forget about rebates if you have to print stuff out, they're not worth the trouble. Also, dry your ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I think the people saying it 's human-nature to want paper are the same who would be uncomfortable with a bidet.I have a paperless office , and have had for years .
I scanned my old papers for archival , and stopped flow of new ones .
I do not own a printer.I also do n't use toilet paper , and have n't for years .
I find water to be superior for cleaning , and it 's one less thing to shop for.The drawbacks are , forget about rebates if you have to print stuff out , they 're not worth the trouble .
Also , dry your ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I think the people saying it's human-nature to want paper are the same who would be uncomfortable with a bidet.I have a paperless office, and have had for years.
I scanned my old papers for archival, and stopped flow of new ones.
I do not own a printer.I also don't use toilet paper, and haven't for years.
I find water to be superior for cleaning, and it's one less thing to shop for.The drawbacks are, forget about rebates if you have to print stuff out, they're not worth the trouble.
Also, dry your ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560210</id>
	<title>reading on the run</title>
	<author>drfireman</author>
	<datestamp>1269166260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I often print things out so that I can read them on the run.  A decent e-reader would eliminate that need entirely, but tragically no one makes one yet.  I have high hopes that this will be fixed sometime this year or next.  That's not the only obstacle to a paperless office, but that's by far the #1 paper consumer for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I often print things out so that I can read them on the run .
A decent e-reader would eliminate that need entirely , but tragically no one makes one yet .
I have high hopes that this will be fixed sometime this year or next .
That 's not the only obstacle to a paperless office , but that 's by far the # 1 paper consumer for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I often print things out so that I can read them on the run.
A decent e-reader would eliminate that need entirely, but tragically no one makes one yet.
I have high hopes that this will be fixed sometime this year or next.
That's not the only obstacle to a paperless office, but that's by far the #1 paper consumer for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559864</id>
	<title>Trust</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269164100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Trust - as in "we trust that a piece of paper hasn't changed since it was printed"</p><p>Where things only exist in a database, there is no assurance that they haven't been changed.</p><p>An example would be climate data.  Twenty years ago, almost all climate scientists showed the Medieval Warm Period in their temperature vs. time graphs.  These days, the same scientists show a flat line where the MWP used to be.  Their paper publications clearly demonstrate that they have changed their tune.  Their web sites give no clue that there was a change.</p><p>What is my point?  Paper makes it harder for people to change history.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Trust - as in " we trust that a piece of paper has n't changed since it was printed " Where things only exist in a database , there is no assurance that they have n't been changed.An example would be climate data .
Twenty years ago , almost all climate scientists showed the Medieval Warm Period in their temperature vs. time graphs .
These days , the same scientists show a flat line where the MWP used to be .
Their paper publications clearly demonstrate that they have changed their tune .
Their web sites give no clue that there was a change.What is my point ?
Paper makes it harder for people to change history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trust - as in "we trust that a piece of paper hasn't changed since it was printed"Where things only exist in a database, there is no assurance that they haven't been changed.An example would be climate data.
Twenty years ago, almost all climate scientists showed the Medieval Warm Period in their temperature vs. time graphs.
These days, the same scientists show a flat line where the MWP used to be.
Their paper publications clearly demonstrate that they have changed their tune.
Their web sites give no clue that there was a change.What is my point?
Paper makes it harder for people to change history.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559460</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1269204420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just having tons and tons of paper sitting in a warehouse was was much cheaper, I heard later.</p></div><p>I basically agree with your points, but there is a difference between a <i>well managed</i> document control system, and one implemented by bunglers. Plus electronic documents have the advantage that they can be backed up offsite somewhere: that warehouse full of paper may indeed be cheaper but it's not necessarily <i>safer</i>.
<br> <br>
I've been involved in document control projects (primarily used for pulling manufacturing production prints) and you're right: paper is damned useful, for all the reasons you outlined. Consequently, I never made any attempt to develop or promote a paperless system because it a. wouldn't have served the purpose and b. would never have been accepted anyway.
<br> <br>
All the software did was provide a convenient, searchable interface to servers full of untold thousands of engineering drawings (both Autocad DWGs and scans of paper drawings) so that they could be viewed on-screen and <i>printed</i> if desired. That offered the best of both worlds: quick and easy viewability for those that don't need a hardcopy, with a printout only a mouse-click away. No expensive content manager (the software didn't require any proprietary server-side component of any kind, and rendered all drawings locally), and no DBAs competent or otherwise.
<br> <br>
The first version of that app was DOS-based and ran over dial-up, with about a dozen plants around the world using it, pulling files from a big Solaris server. That was back in the late eighties, and it ran for years without much need for maintenance (other than the occasional hardware upgrade or repair.) I eventually wrote a Windows version of the application, and they're still running it. They've gone through several major server and connectivity upgrades over the years, I've heard, but I didn't even have to be involved in that. They also have a disaster recovery plan in place, so even if the server room burns through the floor they won't lose their drawings. That's something you can't easily do with tons of paper.
<br> <br>
Sometimes you have to think things through and realize what it is you <i>don't</i> need. Big-ass proprietary software vendors have a vested interest in locking you into hypercomplex, overbuilt systems that may or may not do what you want, but are virtually guaranteed to cost more than they're worth.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just having tons and tons of paper sitting in a warehouse was was much cheaper , I heard later.I basically agree with your points , but there is a difference between a well managed document control system , and one implemented by bunglers .
Plus electronic documents have the advantage that they can be backed up offsite somewhere : that warehouse full of paper may indeed be cheaper but it 's not necessarily safer .
I 've been involved in document control projects ( primarily used for pulling manufacturing production prints ) and you 're right : paper is damned useful , for all the reasons you outlined .
Consequently , I never made any attempt to develop or promote a paperless system because it a. would n't have served the purpose and b. would never have been accepted anyway .
All the software did was provide a convenient , searchable interface to servers full of untold thousands of engineering drawings ( both Autocad DWGs and scans of paper drawings ) so that they could be viewed on-screen and printed if desired .
That offered the best of both worlds : quick and easy viewability for those that do n't need a hardcopy , with a printout only a mouse-click away .
No expensive content manager ( the software did n't require any proprietary server-side component of any kind , and rendered all drawings locally ) , and no DBAs competent or otherwise .
The first version of that app was DOS-based and ran over dial-up , with about a dozen plants around the world using it , pulling files from a big Solaris server .
That was back in the late eighties , and it ran for years without much need for maintenance ( other than the occasional hardware upgrade or repair .
) I eventually wrote a Windows version of the application , and they 're still running it .
They 've gone through several major server and connectivity upgrades over the years , I 've heard , but I did n't even have to be involved in that .
They also have a disaster recovery plan in place , so even if the server room burns through the floor they wo n't lose their drawings .
That 's something you ca n't easily do with tons of paper .
Sometimes you have to think things through and realize what it is you do n't need .
Big-ass proprietary software vendors have a vested interest in locking you into hypercomplex , overbuilt systems that may or may not do what you want , but are virtually guaranteed to cost more than they 're worth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just having tons and tons of paper sitting in a warehouse was was much cheaper, I heard later.I basically agree with your points, but there is a difference between a well managed document control system, and one implemented by bunglers.
Plus electronic documents have the advantage that they can be backed up offsite somewhere: that warehouse full of paper may indeed be cheaper but it's not necessarily safer.
I've been involved in document control projects (primarily used for pulling manufacturing production prints) and you're right: paper is damned useful, for all the reasons you outlined.
Consequently, I never made any attempt to develop or promote a paperless system because it a. wouldn't have served the purpose and b. would never have been accepted anyway.
All the software did was provide a convenient, searchable interface to servers full of untold thousands of engineering drawings (both Autocad DWGs and scans of paper drawings) so that they could be viewed on-screen and printed if desired.
That offered the best of both worlds: quick and easy viewability for those that don't need a hardcopy, with a printout only a mouse-click away.
No expensive content manager (the software didn't require any proprietary server-side component of any kind, and rendered all drawings locally), and no DBAs competent or otherwise.
The first version of that app was DOS-based and ran over dial-up, with about a dozen plants around the world using it, pulling files from a big Solaris server.
That was back in the late eighties, and it ran for years without much need for maintenance (other than the occasional hardware upgrade or repair.
) I eventually wrote a Windows version of the application, and they're still running it.
They've gone through several major server and connectivity upgrades over the years, I've heard, but I didn't even have to be involved in that.
They also have a disaster recovery plan in place, so even if the server room burns through the floor they won't lose their drawings.
That's something you can't easily do with tons of paper.
Sometimes you have to think things through and realize what it is you don't need.
Big-ass proprietary software vendors have a vested interest in locking you into hypercomplex, overbuilt systems that may or may not do what you want, but are virtually guaranteed to cost more than they're worth.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560248</id>
	<title>Re:Drawing</title>
	<author>Brett Buck</author>
	<datestamp>1269166500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I might add that the drawing/sketching tools on Windows are the absolute pits. With MacDraw or Sharedraw, I can just about do as well as I do on paper. But there's nothing even close to the same on Windows, and the most-common tools (Powerpoint and Word draw functions) are the most irritating pieces of crap ever foisted on humanity. It *looks* like it should work, but things don't click to grids, and you will be going along fine, and then "something" will happen and it will realign everything. Same with Visio. The next step up is something like a CAD program which is just far too complex.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; If someone wrote a program like Macdraw/Sharedraw for Windows, and that *actually worked* in a predictable fashion, it would be a huge breakthrough.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Brett</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I might add that the drawing/sketching tools on Windows are the absolute pits .
With MacDraw or Sharedraw , I can just about do as well as I do on paper .
But there 's nothing even close to the same on Windows , and the most-common tools ( Powerpoint and Word draw functions ) are the most irritating pieces of crap ever foisted on humanity .
It * looks * like it should work , but things do n't click to grids , and you will be going along fine , and then " something " will happen and it will realign everything .
Same with Visio .
The next step up is something like a CAD program which is just far too complex .
            If someone wrote a program like Macdraw/Sharedraw for Windows , and that * actually worked * in a predictable fashion , it would be a huge breakthrough .
          Brett</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I might add that the drawing/sketching tools on Windows are the absolute pits.
With MacDraw or Sharedraw, I can just about do as well as I do on paper.
But there's nothing even close to the same on Windows, and the most-common tools (Powerpoint and Word draw functions) are the most irritating pieces of crap ever foisted on humanity.
It *looks* like it should work, but things don't click to grids, and you will be going along fine, and then "something" will happen and it will realign everything.
Same with Visio.
The next step up is something like a CAD program which is just far too complex.
            If someone wrote a program like Macdraw/Sharedraw for Windows, and that *actually worked* in a predictable fashion, it would be a huge breakthrough.
          Brett</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559878</id>
	<title>I don't understand this argument.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269164160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I have a car analogy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I have a car analogy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I have a car analogy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564204</id>
	<title>And the answer is.... Paper !</title>
	<author>Foske</author>
	<datestamp>1269200340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, it's no match for scissors, but beats stone. What else in our universe does that ?</p><p>But serious... paper, pen and pencil, that's all you need.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , it 's no match for scissors , but beats stone .
What else in our universe does that ? But serious... paper , pen and pencil , that 's all you need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, it's no match for scissors, but beats stone.
What else in our universe does that ?But serious... paper, pen and pencil, that's all you need.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561376</id>
	<title>Re:Reliability</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269174840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I think you're right.  I mean, all those other people who claim that they have had Windows crash must be making it up, every last one of them must be a Linux or Apple stooge.  Those Windows shops around the place don't make money by offering to reload Windows, and salvage data from crashed systems.  They only make money from new hardware sold.</p><p> <b>Or...</b> you might be the exception rather than the rule.  My brand new Windows 7 install, with all the updates on it, flashed up a blue screen within a week of installation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I think you 're right .
I mean , all those other people who claim that they have had Windows crash must be making it up , every last one of them must be a Linux or Apple stooge .
Those Windows shops around the place do n't make money by offering to reload Windows , and salvage data from crashed systems .
They only make money from new hardware sold .
Or... you might be the exception rather than the rule .
My brand new Windows 7 install , with all the updates on it , flashed up a blue screen within a week of installation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I think you're right.
I mean, all those other people who claim that they have had Windows crash must be making it up, every last one of them must be a Linux or Apple stooge.
Those Windows shops around the place don't make money by offering to reload Windows, and salvage data from crashed systems.
They only make money from new hardware sold.
Or... you might be the exception rather than the rule.
My brand new Windows 7 install, with all the updates on it, flashed up a blue screen within a week of installation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559874</id>
	<title>screen real estate &gt;= desk real estate</title>
	<author>rcpitt</author>
	<datestamp>1269164160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been working at the "paperless office" on and off ever since I got into computers. I used to sell "snap-sets" of forms back in the days of the Ditto Duplicator and carbon-paper, so know a bit about this kind of thing.
<p>
In my own office, I've found that unless I have at least as much screen real estate as I do desk (I currently have more screen than desk in front of me if you subtract the space needed for the keyboard, mouse and coffee cup<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) I HAVE to print out stuff to allow me to refer to it as I work on the screen.
</p><p>
I have 4 16x9 aspect monitors on my workstation and rarely find I need more - but have room for 2 more monitors on the current cards and room for one more dual-head card in the box (4 PCI-X16 slots)
</p><p>
The printer only gets used for stuff I have to take with me because my cell phone is only 1/4 VGA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been working at the " paperless office " on and off ever since I got into computers .
I used to sell " snap-sets " of forms back in the days of the Ditto Duplicator and carbon-paper , so know a bit about this kind of thing .
In my own office , I 've found that unless I have at least as much screen real estate as I do desk ( I currently have more screen than desk in front of me if you subtract the space needed for the keyboard , mouse and coffee cup ; ) I HAVE to print out stuff to allow me to refer to it as I work on the screen .
I have 4 16x9 aspect monitors on my workstation and rarely find I need more - but have room for 2 more monitors on the current cards and room for one more dual-head card in the box ( 4 PCI-X16 slots ) The printer only gets used for stuff I have to take with me because my cell phone is only 1/4 VGA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been working at the "paperless office" on and off ever since I got into computers.
I used to sell "snap-sets" of forms back in the days of the Ditto Duplicator and carbon-paper, so know a bit about this kind of thing.
In my own office, I've found that unless I have at least as much screen real estate as I do desk (I currently have more screen than desk in front of me if you subtract the space needed for the keyboard, mouse and coffee cup ;) I HAVE to print out stuff to allow me to refer to it as I work on the screen.
I have 4 16x9 aspect monitors on my workstation and rarely find I need more - but have room for 2 more monitors on the current cards and room for one more dual-head card in the box (4 PCI-X16 slots)

The printer only gets used for stuff I have to take with me because my cell phone is only 1/4 VGA</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563856</id>
	<title>My Company Certainly Isn't Helping</title>
	<author>mikestew</author>
	<datestamp>1269195120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm the test manager for a company that creates products for people to write on paper and have that writing turned into digital ink, and ultimately recognized as useful information once it gets back into the software (integrates with Excel, PDF, ESRI, and the like). I'll bet the test team alone goes through a couple of boxes of paper a week. I can't remember the last time I bought paper for home.</p><p>If the paperless office stood any chance of happening any time soon, our company would be doomed. But, for whatever reasons, the reality is that there exist situations where people need to print paper and write on it. Fire fighters in wildfire situations printing A0 or bigger maps, and scribbling plans on them. Court documents, military scenarios where even a Toughbook isn't going to cut it ("a computer with a bullet hole in it is a brick, a map with a hole is still a map").</p><p>Now you people printing your email, or copies of a PowerPoint slide deck for a meeting, just cut it the hell out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm the test manager for a company that creates products for people to write on paper and have that writing turned into digital ink , and ultimately recognized as useful information once it gets back into the software ( integrates with Excel , PDF , ESRI , and the like ) .
I 'll bet the test team alone goes through a couple of boxes of paper a week .
I ca n't remember the last time I bought paper for home.If the paperless office stood any chance of happening any time soon , our company would be doomed .
But , for whatever reasons , the reality is that there exist situations where people need to print paper and write on it .
Fire fighters in wildfire situations printing A0 or bigger maps , and scribbling plans on them .
Court documents , military scenarios where even a Toughbook is n't going to cut it ( " a computer with a bullet hole in it is a brick , a map with a hole is still a map " ) .Now you people printing your email , or copies of a PowerPoint slide deck for a meeting , just cut it the hell out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm the test manager for a company that creates products for people to write on paper and have that writing turned into digital ink, and ultimately recognized as useful information once it gets back into the software (integrates with Excel, PDF, ESRI, and the like).
I'll bet the test team alone goes through a couple of boxes of paper a week.
I can't remember the last time I bought paper for home.If the paperless office stood any chance of happening any time soon, our company would be doomed.
But, for whatever reasons, the reality is that there exist situations where people need to print paper and write on it.
Fire fighters in wildfire situations printing A0 or bigger maps, and scribbling plans on them.
Court documents, military scenarios where even a Toughbook isn't going to cut it ("a computer with a bullet hole in it is a brick, a map with a hole is still a map").Now you people printing your email, or copies of a PowerPoint slide deck for a meeting, just cut it the hell out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561440</id>
	<title>Re:A couple of things</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269175320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><ol><li>Change control. Many times documents can be changed in the computer and, while it records that there was a change, there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change. The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that <i>was</i> what was originally specified.</li></ol></div><p>and for that reason alone, i hope some offices never become paperless, anything important enough to matter later should have a paper trail. ie. legal,health,police,govmt issues.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Change control .
Many times documents can be changed in the computer and , while it records that there was a change , there 's no record anymore of what the document said before the change .
The paper copies in my drawer ca n't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified.and for that reason alone , i hope some offices never become paperless , anything important enough to matter later should have a paper trail .
ie. legal,health,police,govmt issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Change control.
Many times documents can be changed in the computer and, while it records that there was a change, there's no record anymore of what the document said before the change.
The paper copies in my drawer can't be changed and I can pull them out to prove that yes that was what was originally specified.and for that reason alone, i hope some offices never become paperless, anything important enough to matter later should have a paper trail.
ie. legal,health,police,govmt issues.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559716</id>
	<title>Reliability and Flexibility</title>
	<author>DogDude</author>
	<datestamp>1269163020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We keep every order and receiving voucher and invoice that comes through the office.  Why?  RELIABILITY and FLEXIBILITY.<br> <br>
1. Flexibility is obvious.  You can write anything on paper.  Try scratching something out in a word processor, and writing in the margins.  It CAN be done, but it's a royal PITA.<br>
<br>
2. Reliability is the big kicker.  There's more to reliability than just keeping good backups.  There's also the reliance on the technology to get to those electronic documents.  It's just not good enough for me to base my entire business on it.  The second that anybody has a technical problem, it's lost time and money.  There are no technical problems with paper.<br>
<br>
Paper is really, really cheap, really easy, and really dependable.  I won't be getting rid of paper any time soon.  In fact, I need to go fax something...</htmltext>
<tokenext>We keep every order and receiving voucher and invoice that comes through the office .
Why ? RELIABILITY and FLEXIBILITY .
1. Flexibility is obvious .
You can write anything on paper .
Try scratching something out in a word processor , and writing in the margins .
It CAN be done , but it 's a royal PITA .
2. Reliability is the big kicker .
There 's more to reliability than just keeping good backups .
There 's also the reliance on the technology to get to those electronic documents .
It 's just not good enough for me to base my entire business on it .
The second that anybody has a technical problem , it 's lost time and money .
There are no technical problems with paper .
Paper is really , really cheap , really easy , and really dependable .
I wo n't be getting rid of paper any time soon .
In fact , I need to go fax something.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We keep every order and receiving voucher and invoice that comes through the office.
Why?  RELIABILITY and FLEXIBILITY.
1. Flexibility is obvious.
You can write anything on paper.
Try scratching something out in a word processor, and writing in the margins.
It CAN be done, but it's a royal PITA.
2. Reliability is the big kicker.
There's more to reliability than just keeping good backups.
There's also the reliance on the technology to get to those electronic documents.
It's just not good enough for me to base my entire business on it.
The second that anybody has a technical problem, it's lost time and money.
There are no technical problems with paper.
Paper is really, really cheap, really easy, and really dependable.
I won't be getting rid of paper any time soon.
In fact, I need to go fax something...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560050</id>
	<title>I know what holds 'em back</title>
	<author>vik</author>
	<datestamp>1269165180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>- the printed disclaimers, safety warnings and licence documentation.</p><p>Vik<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:v)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>- the printed disclaimers , safety warnings and licence documentation.Vik : v )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- the printed disclaimers, safety warnings and licence documentation.Vik :v)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565426</id>
	<title>Portrait Monitors with markup capability</title>
	<author>EmagGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269263700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's what's holding it up. When monitors integrate the pen tablet and portrait layout, then a paperless office will be feasible. Until then, forget about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's what 's holding it up .
When monitors integrate the pen tablet and portrait layout , then a paperless office will be feasible .
Until then , forget about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's what's holding it up.
When monitors integrate the pen tablet and portrait layout, then a paperless office will be feasible.
Until then, forget about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562840</id>
	<title>Origami</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269185580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't fold up an email into a dart and chuck it at your coworker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't fold up an email into a dart and chuck it at your coworker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't fold up an email into a dart and chuck it at your coworker.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561066</id>
	<title>Re:Word Processors are holding us back...</title>
	<author>arminw</author>
	<datestamp>1269171960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...IMO, the paperless office isn't going to happen....</p><p>Until someone invents a way to read digital bits without electricity. To read the data written on paper requires only eyeballs and a light source. Most people I know have those.</p><p>I can still read a 25 year old paper document, but I have some documents recorded on 8 inch floppies which neither I nor anyone else I know can read. Fortunately I still have them printed on paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...IMO , the paperless office is n't going to happen....Until someone invents a way to read digital bits without electricity .
To read the data written on paper requires only eyeballs and a light source .
Most people I know have those.I can still read a 25 year old paper document , but I have some documents recorded on 8 inch floppies which neither I nor anyone else I know can read .
Fortunately I still have them printed on paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...IMO, the paperless office isn't going to happen....Until someone invents a way to read digital bits without electricity.
To read the data written on paper requires only eyeballs and a light source.
Most people I know have those.I can still read a 25 year old paper document, but I have some documents recorded on 8 inch floppies which neither I nor anyone else I know can read.
Fortunately I still have them printed on paper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559516</id>
	<title>Why bother, just recycle</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1269204780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>90/10 rule - we're most of the way there, to get that last 10\% will require a massive organizational and technological shift.  Who cares, just recycle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>90/10 rule - we 're most of the way there , to get that last 10 \ % will require a massive organizational and technological shift .
Who cares , just recycle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>90/10 rule - we're most of the way there, to get that last 10\% will require a massive organizational and technological shift.
Who cares, just recycle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559698</id>
	<title>Try backup</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269162900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only thing that is stopping our office, is backup. Digital backup is a joke. Over the years I've tried many types of backups formats.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.TXT,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.RTF, HTML. Those three are the most reliable, and readable. But what about video? There's about 5 formats I can think of off the top of my head. Pictures? Well unless it's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.TIFF then you run the risk of data corruption caused by the compression. Sound is the same way. I found the majority of data corruption was done on compressed files.</p><p>THEN comes the problem of media. How do you store huge amounts of data? Use to be tape, but they broke, or the magnetic was damageable, AND how do you read such?. Optical? Like tape, they didn't keep up with the storage. The biggest DVDs are 8.x gigs. Backing up 500gs of storage would take, around 63 DVDs. The only possible way is with external harddrives. But then, your talking magnetic backup, which runs the risk of data corruption.</p><p>The only sure method of backup is printing them on paper. True, you could have a fire, or flood. But look at books and printed material. They last 1,000s of years. In our office. We have to keep backup, and paper is the only reliable method. We print out everything important, including e-mails.</p><p>Until the 2 problems of data storage is solved. Media, and format, the 'paperless office' is a joke.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing that is stopping our office , is backup .
Digital backup is a joke .
Over the years I 've tried many types of backups formats .
.TXT , .RTF , HTML .
Those three are the most reliable , and readable .
But what about video ?
There 's about 5 formats I can think of off the top of my head .
Pictures ? Well unless it 's .TIFF then you run the risk of data corruption caused by the compression .
Sound is the same way .
I found the majority of data corruption was done on compressed files.THEN comes the problem of media .
How do you store huge amounts of data ?
Use to be tape , but they broke , or the magnetic was damageable , AND how do you read such ? .
Optical ? Like tape , they did n't keep up with the storage .
The biggest DVDs are 8.x gigs .
Backing up 500gs of storage would take , around 63 DVDs .
The only possible way is with external harddrives .
But then , your talking magnetic backup , which runs the risk of data corruption.The only sure method of backup is printing them on paper .
True , you could have a fire , or flood .
But look at books and printed material .
They last 1,000s of years .
In our office .
We have to keep backup , and paper is the only reliable method .
We print out everything important , including e-mails.Until the 2 problems of data storage is solved .
Media , and format , the 'paperless office ' is a joke .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing that is stopping our office, is backup.
Digital backup is a joke.
Over the years I've tried many types of backups formats.
.TXT, .RTF, HTML.
Those three are the most reliable, and readable.
But what about video?
There's about 5 formats I can think of off the top of my head.
Pictures? Well unless it's .TIFF then you run the risk of data corruption caused by the compression.
Sound is the same way.
I found the majority of data corruption was done on compressed files.THEN comes the problem of media.
How do you store huge amounts of data?
Use to be tape, but they broke, or the magnetic was damageable, AND how do you read such?.
Optical? Like tape, they didn't keep up with the storage.
The biggest DVDs are 8.x gigs.
Backing up 500gs of storage would take, around 63 DVDs.
The only possible way is with external harddrives.
But then, your talking magnetic backup, which runs the risk of data corruption.The only sure method of backup is printing them on paper.
True, you could have a fire, or flood.
But look at books and printed material.
They last 1,000s of years.
In our office.
We have to keep backup, and paper is the only reliable method.
We print out everything important, including e-mails.Until the 2 problems of data storage is solved.
Media, and format, the 'paperless office' is a joke.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560004</id>
	<title>Paperless</title>
	<author>darth dickinson</author>
	<datestamp>1269164940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's holding back the paperless office?  Flipping FAX MACHINES.  I work for a multi-billion dollar international bank and if faxes stop working there is no end to the screaming and whining.  Kinda sad that in the 21st Century banking is still done using technology from 1994.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's holding back the paperless office ?
Flipping FAX MACHINES .
I work for a multi-billion dollar international bank and if faxes stop working there is no end to the screaming and whining .
Kinda sad that in the 21st Century banking is still done using technology from 1994 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's holding back the paperless office?
Flipping FAX MACHINES.
I work for a multi-billion dollar international bank and if faxes stop working there is no end to the screaming and whining.
Kinda sad that in the 21st Century banking is still done using technology from 1994.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560150</id>
	<title>Re:Basically?</title>
	<author>ewrong</author>
	<datestamp>1269165900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In UK law at least, a public private key is perfectly acceptable.</p><p>

<a href="http://www.out-law.com/page-443" title="out-law.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.out-law.com/page-443</a> [out-law.com]

</p><p>UK contract law tends to be quite open about what constitutes a contract mind, verbal agreement is enough but obviously harder to prove in a court of law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In UK law at least , a public private key is perfectly acceptable .
http : //www.out-law.com/page-443 [ out-law.com ] UK contract law tends to be quite open about what constitutes a contract mind , verbal agreement is enough but obviously harder to prove in a court of law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In UK law at least, a public private key is perfectly acceptable.
http://www.out-law.com/page-443 [out-law.com]

UK contract law tends to be quite open about what constitutes a contract mind, verbal agreement is enough but obviously harder to prove in a court of law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559726</id>
	<title>Not yet paperless, but....</title>
	<author>Pascal Sartoretti</author>
	<datestamp>1269163140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe the paperless office has not arrived yet but at least in my domain (software engineering), there has been a huge change in the last 3-5 years  : most of the documents are exchanged with customers/partners in electronic form and the reference version is somewhere on server (most of the times on a simple file server, sometimes in a document management system). Only a few documents remain in paper form (contracts, orders, etc...), but they are quickly scanned so that we only use the electronic version in day-to-day use (while the paper version is archived).
<br> <br>
 Yes, there is still a lot of paper around, but it is mostly used for personal usage, and can simply be thrown away once a project is over.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe the paperless office has not arrived yet but at least in my domain ( software engineering ) , there has been a huge change in the last 3-5 years : most of the documents are exchanged with customers/partners in electronic form and the reference version is somewhere on server ( most of the times on a simple file server , sometimes in a document management system ) .
Only a few documents remain in paper form ( contracts , orders , etc... ) , but they are quickly scanned so that we only use the electronic version in day-to-day use ( while the paper version is archived ) .
Yes , there is still a lot of paper around , but it is mostly used for personal usage , and can simply be thrown away once a project is over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe the paperless office has not arrived yet but at least in my domain (software engineering), there has been a huge change in the last 3-5 years  : most of the documents are exchanged with customers/partners in electronic form and the reference version is somewhere on server (most of the times on a simple file server, sometimes in a document management system).
Only a few documents remain in paper form (contracts, orders, etc...), but they are quickly scanned so that we only use the electronic version in day-to-day use (while the paper version is archived).
Yes, there is still a lot of paper around, but it is mostly used for personal usage, and can simply be thrown away once a project is over.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559594</id>
	<title>I couldn't agree more.</title>
	<author>floppyraid</author>
	<datestamp>1269162060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are some things that paper has that digital copies can never replace.<br> <br>

Many people feel that some pieces of sensitive information are safer on a piece of paper in a locked desk than they are on a drive on your network.
<br> <br>
The feel of assurance one gets from a physical, actual, handwritten signature (sad to say but even a generic 'rubber stamped' signature has a better "feel" to it than receiving a generic pdf form regardless of what new digital cert/signature accompanies the pdf.)
<br> <br>
If you graduated from a nice college, how would you feel if they just emailed you a PDF of your diploma? It wouldn't 'feel' the same printing it out and hanging it on the wall, for whatever reason. (I'd say it goes deeper than that, though. 1s and 0s aren't directly tangible in and of themselves. Since they are so easy to reproduce copies of them, there really isn't the same type of sentimental value. If you 'lost' a PDF book your girlfriend gave you, for example, you could redownload the exact same copy of the file over again-- and you would experience no sense of loss... However, if your girlfriend bought you a physical copy of the book, and you lost it, even if you went to the store and repurchased an exact same copy of the same printing of the same book-- it wouldn't be the same 'book'. There is something empty about the 1's and 0's, and, though I love the possibilities that technology makes available to us, I hope that never changes.)
<br> <br>
Physical placement of actual papers registers in the mind. If you have a collage of papers above your desk with various phone numbers, IPs, or whatever, your mind usually connects with that easier than 'what file/folder is that in?', and it's easier to look up than it is to click through multiple folders. (It's less steps to look up, than it is to sift through).
<br> <br>
I think that paper and digital copies compliment eachother. They each have certain advantages over the other, but they can never fully replace one another.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some things that paper has that digital copies can never replace .
Many people feel that some pieces of sensitive information are safer on a piece of paper in a locked desk than they are on a drive on your network .
The feel of assurance one gets from a physical , actual , handwritten signature ( sad to say but even a generic 'rubber stamped ' signature has a better " feel " to it than receiving a generic pdf form regardless of what new digital cert/signature accompanies the pdf .
) If you graduated from a nice college , how would you feel if they just emailed you a PDF of your diploma ?
It would n't 'feel ' the same printing it out and hanging it on the wall , for whatever reason .
( I 'd say it goes deeper than that , though .
1s and 0s are n't directly tangible in and of themselves .
Since they are so easy to reproduce copies of them , there really is n't the same type of sentimental value .
If you 'lost ' a PDF book your girlfriend gave you , for example , you could redownload the exact same copy of the file over again-- and you would experience no sense of loss... However , if your girlfriend bought you a physical copy of the book , and you lost it , even if you went to the store and repurchased an exact same copy of the same printing of the same book-- it would n't be the same 'book' .
There is something empty about the 1 's and 0 's , and , though I love the possibilities that technology makes available to us , I hope that never changes .
) Physical placement of actual papers registers in the mind .
If you have a collage of papers above your desk with various phone numbers , IPs , or whatever , your mind usually connects with that easier than 'what file/folder is that in ?
' , and it 's easier to look up than it is to click through multiple folders .
( It 's less steps to look up , than it is to sift through ) .
I think that paper and digital copies compliment eachother .
They each have certain advantages over the other , but they can never fully replace one another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some things that paper has that digital copies can never replace.
Many people feel that some pieces of sensitive information are safer on a piece of paper in a locked desk than they are on a drive on your network.
The feel of assurance one gets from a physical, actual, handwritten signature (sad to say but even a generic 'rubber stamped' signature has a better "feel" to it than receiving a generic pdf form regardless of what new digital cert/signature accompanies the pdf.
)
 
If you graduated from a nice college, how would you feel if they just emailed you a PDF of your diploma?
It wouldn't 'feel' the same printing it out and hanging it on the wall, for whatever reason.
(I'd say it goes deeper than that, though.
1s and 0s aren't directly tangible in and of themselves.
Since they are so easy to reproduce copies of them, there really isn't the same type of sentimental value.
If you 'lost' a PDF book your girlfriend gave you, for example, you could redownload the exact same copy of the file over again-- and you would experience no sense of loss... However, if your girlfriend bought you a physical copy of the book, and you lost it, even if you went to the store and repurchased an exact same copy of the same printing of the same book-- it wouldn't be the same 'book'.
There is something empty about the 1's and 0's, and, though I love the possibilities that technology makes available to us, I hope that never changes.
)
 
Physical placement of actual papers registers in the mind.
If you have a collage of papers above your desk with various phone numbers, IPs, or whatever, your mind usually connects with that easier than 'what file/folder is that in?
', and it's easier to look up than it is to click through multiple folders.
(It's less steps to look up, than it is to sift through).
I think that paper and digital copies compliment eachother.
They each have certain advantages over the other, but they can never fully replace one another.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31590732</id>
	<title>already gone...</title>
	<author>twoHats</author>
	<datestamp>1269345300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>went paperless about 8 years ago - haven't missed it at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>went paperless about 8 years ago - have n't missed it at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>went paperless about 8 years ago - haven't missed it at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31567448</id>
	<title>Re:A: The law.</title>
	<author>DrMaurer</author>
	<datestamp>1269270420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A simple search for the words "software validation" will be helpful in someone wanting to know the extents of such "approvals".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A simple search for the words " software validation " will be helpful in someone wanting to know the extents of such " approvals " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A simple search for the words "software validation" will be helpful in someone wanting to know the extents of such "approvals".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563246</id>
	<title>Government Standards</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269189120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No matter what industry you are in, one will encounter the undeniable need to have an 'original' copy of something on paper, even if it originated in a purely digital manner.  If you do business with other entities, the number of incidents will only increase.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No matter what industry you are in , one will encounter the undeniable need to have an 'original ' copy of something on paper , even if it originated in a purely digital manner .
If you do business with other entities , the number of incidents will only increase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No matter what industry you are in, one will encounter the undeniable need to have an 'original' copy of something on paper, even if it originated in a purely digital manner.
If you do business with other entities, the number of incidents will only increase.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559672</id>
	<title>Nothing...</title>
	<author>u64</author>
	<datestamp>1269162720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problems is those pesky irl humans. They want irl things by default.</p><p>Technically there's no need for 90\% of all paper usage. But making<br>the change costs alot of training and trail and error. (Same problem that<br>prevent the world from swittching up to Linux)</p><p>However, for those that begin the change now, will get the rewards earlier.<br>And once the switch to paper-less (and/or all Linux) has been made, there's<br>no need to ever going back.</p><p>Try small scale, work out the bugs. Write down the costs and savings, people<br>love it when change is converted to a measurement they understand, money.</p><p>Try bigger scale only when the small scale has been properly mapped. Once<br>a tiny snowball begins rolling, it's hard for the backward people to stop it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problems is those pesky irl humans .
They want irl things by default.Technically there 's no need for 90 \ % of all paper usage .
But makingthe change costs alot of training and trail and error .
( Same problem thatprevent the world from swittching up to Linux ) However , for those that begin the change now , will get the rewards earlier.And once the switch to paper-less ( and/or all Linux ) has been made , there'sno need to ever going back.Try small scale , work out the bugs .
Write down the costs and savings , peoplelove it when change is converted to a measurement they understand , money.Try bigger scale only when the small scale has been properly mapped .
Oncea tiny snowball begins rolling , it 's hard for the backward people to stop it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problems is those pesky irl humans.
They want irl things by default.Technically there's no need for 90\% of all paper usage.
But makingthe change costs alot of training and trail and error.
(Same problem thatprevent the world from swittching up to Linux)However, for those that begin the change now, will get the rewards earlier.And once the switch to paper-less (and/or all Linux) has been made, there'sno need to ever going back.Try small scale, work out the bugs.
Write down the costs and savings, peoplelove it when change is converted to a measurement they understand, money.Try bigger scale only when the small scale has been properly mapped.
Oncea tiny snowball begins rolling, it's hard for the backward people to stop it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559490</id>
	<title>Re:Resistance Of Change</title>
	<author>nlawalker</author>
	<datestamp>1269204600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think it's always resistance to change. I frequently experiment with new ways of keeping my life organized and I almost always end up coming back to a system that involves paper, stickies or notecards, at least in part. Outlook tasks and calendar entries definitely have their place, especially when your whole office is using them, but it often helps me to have notes take up physical space in my life. After a long period of trying to deny it and "go paperless," I finally admitted to myself that spatial organization was incredibly effective and I needed to take advantage of it.</p><p>I tried the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipster\_PDA" title="wikipedia.org">Hipster PDA</a> [wikipedia.org] when I was in college and ended up ditching it because I didn't have enough actionable items to track to make it worth it, but my current job is full of little things to remember and act on, and I find it incredibly useful to have everything on cards - I can thumb through them, spread them out, sort them, organize them, etc. I can take the card for what I'm currently working on and put it next to me and help helps me focus a bit.</p><p>I love tools like Outlook and especially OneNote, but I find that when things get stressful or when I have lower-priority items, those tools become dumpsters for information that I drop things into and never sort or see again. My notecards are bite-sized pieces that I can organize how I like on a whim.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it 's always resistance to change .
I frequently experiment with new ways of keeping my life organized and I almost always end up coming back to a system that involves paper , stickies or notecards , at least in part .
Outlook tasks and calendar entries definitely have their place , especially when your whole office is using them , but it often helps me to have notes take up physical space in my life .
After a long period of trying to deny it and " go paperless , " I finally admitted to myself that spatial organization was incredibly effective and I needed to take advantage of it.I tried the Hipster PDA [ wikipedia.org ] when I was in college and ended up ditching it because I did n't have enough actionable items to track to make it worth it , but my current job is full of little things to remember and act on , and I find it incredibly useful to have everything on cards - I can thumb through them , spread them out , sort them , organize them , etc .
I can take the card for what I 'm currently working on and put it next to me and help helps me focus a bit.I love tools like Outlook and especially OneNote , but I find that when things get stressful or when I have lower-priority items , those tools become dumpsters for information that I drop things into and never sort or see again .
My notecards are bite-sized pieces that I can organize how I like on a whim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it's always resistance to change.
I frequently experiment with new ways of keeping my life organized and I almost always end up coming back to a system that involves paper, stickies or notecards, at least in part.
Outlook tasks and calendar entries definitely have their place, especially when your whole office is using them, but it often helps me to have notes take up physical space in my life.
After a long period of trying to deny it and "go paperless," I finally admitted to myself that spatial organization was incredibly effective and I needed to take advantage of it.I tried the Hipster PDA [wikipedia.org] when I was in college and ended up ditching it because I didn't have enough actionable items to track to make it worth it, but my current job is full of little things to remember and act on, and I find it incredibly useful to have everything on cards - I can thumb through them, spread them out, sort them, organize them, etc.
I can take the card for what I'm currently working on and put it next to me and help helps me focus a bit.I love tools like Outlook and especially OneNote, but I find that when things get stressful or when I have lower-priority items, those tools become dumpsters for information that I drop things into and never sort or see again.
My notecards are bite-sized pieces that I can organize how I like on a whim.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560014</id>
	<title>Who says it hasn't?</title>
	<author>Com2Kid</author>
	<datestamp>1269164940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have signed all of 2 pieces of work related paper since starting work ~3 years ago.</p><p>Wait, make that 3.  I had to sketch out how I wanted my desk + bookcase arranged when moving buildings.</p><p>I most often use the work printer for printing out maps of places I am going after work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have signed all of 2 pieces of work related paper since starting work ~ 3 years ago.Wait , make that 3 .
I had to sketch out how I wanted my desk + bookcase arranged when moving buildings.I most often use the work printer for printing out maps of places I am going after work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have signed all of 2 pieces of work related paper since starting work ~3 years ago.Wait, make that 3.
I had to sketch out how I wanted my desk + bookcase arranged when moving buildings.I most often use the work printer for printing out maps of places I am going after work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559826</id>
	<title>Longevity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269163800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the college where I work, the primary problem with going paperless is archives. There is just no digital solution that can match the price and longevity of paper, so while all our records are digital, we also make printouts of them as an analog backup to last indefinitely.</p><p>Also, when writing something that needs to be proofread, we've found that we can usually catch more errors by reading a printout than reading on screen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the college where I work , the primary problem with going paperless is archives .
There is just no digital solution that can match the price and longevity of paper , so while all our records are digital , we also make printouts of them as an analog backup to last indefinitely.Also , when writing something that needs to be proofread , we 've found that we can usually catch more errors by reading a printout than reading on screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the college where I work, the primary problem with going paperless is archives.
There is just no digital solution that can match the price and longevity of paper, so while all our records are digital, we also make printouts of them as an analog backup to last indefinitely.Also, when writing something that needs to be proofread, we've found that we can usually catch more errors by reading a printout than reading on screen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560458</id>
	<title>cloth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269167820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is interesting - did they periodically change the cloth?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is interesting - did they periodically change the cloth ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is interesting - did they periodically change the cloth?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31588720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31569178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31568258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31585634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31580092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565394
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31585416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31571340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31566658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31567448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31585102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31577130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_1843244_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31569178
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559574
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560354
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563170
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559530
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31571340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564854
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560248
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560116
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560668
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559318
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31585634
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559306
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564640
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560030
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562782
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559738
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559424
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560266
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559708
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560908
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561236
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561072
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562268
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31585102
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565394
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560992
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560458
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562058
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561260
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561210
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563676
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559674
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560484
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561160
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559994
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559906
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562774
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559820
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559462
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559402
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31580092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559372
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561580
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559980
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560044
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560744
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31588720
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559756
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560150
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559650
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559464
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564276
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560342
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559416
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560244
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561376
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560622
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559852
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564868
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559436
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560070
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31567448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31562986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31563622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559514
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31585416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31566658
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31577130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31568258
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_1843244.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31559564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31564632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31561440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31565326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_1843244.31560192
</commentlist>
</conversation>
