Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!olivea!oliveb!felix!asylvain
From: asylvain@felix.UUCP (Alvin E. Sylvain)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Paperless office
Message-ID: <152165@felix.UUCP>
Date: 9 Oct 90 01:56:12 GMT
References: <9010031156.AA26927@encore.encore.com>
Sender: daemon@felix.UUCP
Reply-To: asylvain@felix.UUCP (Alvin E. Sylvain)
Organization: FileNet Corp., Costa Mesa, CA
Lines: 64

In article <9010031156.AA26927@encore.encore.com> DAVISM@ATSUVAX1.BITNET ("Michael N. Davis") writes:
>
>There was an interesting article in our local paper, recently, about the
>failures so far to bring about that long promised paperless office.  I
>just glanced at the article, but one statement that stood out was
>that paper is a very inexpensive portable display device.  Until other
>technology can match its price and ease of use, paper will never be
>replaced.  The article also mentioned that paper is a storage device
>and that other technologies can compete with it in that area, but the
>display advantages of paper are still quite formidable.

This is probably it's biggest drawback, easily overcome with nearly
any implementation of a DBMS in the office.  That is, that "portable"
paper will portable itself into being lost!  Come on now, do you really
know *exactly* where your auto registration is?  Or will take you some
time to locate it?  Can you find 1988's 1040 filing in under 5 minutes?

>I don't know if the article mentioned this, but it seems to be an
>ongoing hindrance as well.  Anything that must be signed must be on
>paper.  Electronic copies of contracts, etc, are not binding because
>it is so easy to copy a signature onto another document electronically.
>How will this problem ever be resolved?
>
>Will a paperless office ever exist?
>
>_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
>Michael N. Davis, System Manager, NC A&T State University, Greensboro, NC 27411
>BITNET: DAVISM@ATSUVAX1

A paperless office *can* exist, but you bring up certain security issues
yet to be resolved.  I'm not sure if a "signature on paper" is such a
great thing (unless notarized, of course).

Just as a test, try writing yourself a check for $100, and sign it
"John Hancock".  I'm not seriously suggesting you try this, as I'm sure
it's against the law, and I don't want anyone going to jail.

But maybe some of those checks *do* say John Hancock?  Who has time to
check 50M checks against the sig's of 10K customers?

(I've heard a little something about the Real Estate business.
Here, you typically sign dozens of documents, including documents
where you swear you read some other document you signed, and didn't
just sign it without reading it.  Occasionally one of these documents
slips thru the cracks without signature.  You go on a business trip.
Guess what?  Some agents will routinely forge your signature, rather
than allow the deal to be delayed.)

Therefore, a paperless office requiring some provable way of identifying
signatures would probably be superior to the paper method.  Clearly
an "image" of a signature is not enough, unless there is a notarized piece
of paper backing it up.  Then you'd need a way to prove that *this*
signature from *this* person applies to *this* document, but *not* to
that *other* document that just *happened* to be in the same file!
(E.g., you sign the auto-rental form, then initial the collision
insurance waiver, but don't initial that other insurance waiver.)

A sticky problem!
--
=======================Standard Disclaimers Apply=======================
"We're sorry, but the reality you have dialed is no   |            Alvin
longer in service.  Please check the value of pi,     |   "the Chipmunk"
or pray to your local diety for assistance."          |          Sylvain
== == == == == == =I have no idea what my address is!= == == == == == ==