Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!know!samsung!munnari.oz.au!goanna!minyos!otto!s900657 From: s900657@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Felicity Jones [Ice]) Newsgroups: comp.society.futures Subject: Re: Paperless office Summary: EDI - the paperless office is here already (sort of) Message-ID: <5971@minyos.xx.rmit.oz> Date: 6 Oct 90 12:49:30 GMT References: <9010031156.AA26927@encore.encore.com> <542181945DN5.35B@testsys.uucp> <27575@bellcore.bellcore.com> Sender: news@minyos.xx.rmit.oz Organization: Faculty of Business, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia Lines: 70 In article <27575@bellcore.bellcore.com>, duncan@dduck.ctt.bellcore.com (Scott Duncan) writes: > In article <542181945DN5.35B@testsys.uucp> writes: > > [lots of stuff deleted to save repetition] > > I agree that electronic IDs can be (and are) more secure than a signature. It > is pretty well known (I hope) that banks, for example, routinely do not verify > signatures and do not even check that a signature is for a person authorized > to use an account IF IT IS NOT PRESENTED IN-PERSON. That last point is part > of the issue: because of volume, electronic transactions or paper documents in > bulk are accepted with much less review than a transaction in person. Actually, I was told by our bank that they only verify cheques that are over a certain amount (in this bank's case - $1000) for signature verification and in our case - for the presence of two signatories. Guess that means I could write a cheque for under $1000 and present it unsigned...... like you say, the volume is just too great. > But I think the problem is not that we have the technology to do things but > that we can make people feel comfortable in using the technology. This seems > to be the problem with almost any technology. > Well, it didn't take that long for people to feel comfortable with using ATMs..... just watch the furore when your teller-machine is closed! People have certainly gotten used to that electronic convenience with a vengeance! However, in the main I agree - there are still a lot of "technophobics" out there, and some who are just plain cautious and who can blame them at times..... > > I think a good bit of this goes on now at corporate levels. It is getting > individual people to accept this model of interaction between one another that > is the key -- even those who work in the computing field or for corporations > where such transaction go on routinely. > EDI constitutes more than a "bit" as far as I've read. And it's accepted and even forced upon companies. Take the example of Levi's. They gave their suppliers a deadline - get onto EDI or you no longer deal with us... Large supermarket chains, the automotive industry, I could go on and on - a lot of these corporations will not deal any other way than through EDI and the list is growing bigger and bigger. E-mail was just the beginning. Millions of business transactions every day are being conducted electronically - invoices, purchase orders, payments, you name it, it's being done electronically. In Australia, EDI is seen as a way to bring us closer to markets that have been too far away for practicality and economy to deal with. Our largest retail chain has just signed a contract for what will be one of the biggest EDI projects in the world (or so the hype goes) - certainly it's the biggest this country has ever seen. Many will follow their lead and their suppliers will have no choice, it will become an economic necessity. > > I guess, I am arguing that what you suggest is a more reasonable use of e-mail > compared to how it is currently used. However, the model of use is different > at this point in time. The technology is unquestionably there, but are people > prepared to use it and accept its use in these ways? > Let's hope for the sake of the trees that soon they will have no choice :-) -- ___________________________________________________________________________ Felicity Jones Department of BIS The opinion/s expressed [IceBreaker] Faculty of Business above are my own, so s900657@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au RMIT/VUT don't blame them!