> When was the last time you used carbon paper to make a copy? Have you ever dictated to your secretary who a memorandum should be blind-copied to?
When was the last time you filed a document in a physical folder? Or used a physical clipboard? Have you ever found a physical bug in your computer?
These are all concepts that were once common in the real world, adopted to make computing more familiar and approachable. Whether the physical concepts are still in use is irrelevant. What matters is if the technology is useful, and email most certainly is. Claiming it should banned because some people misuse it is asinine. If anything should be banned because of misuse then it's surely social media, which is actually harmful to society.
That's not because the file/folder analogies are wrong or outdated, but because they don't use filesystems directly.
My point is that it doesn't matter whether these concepts are used in the real world or not; they're just names. People don't understand the difference between the internet and the web, or why the program they use to access a web site is called a "browser", or even what a web "site" is, etc. Sometimes it's not possible to describe a digital concept using analogous terms from the real world, and that's OK.
What's wrong is dismissing a technology based on the terms it uses, as TFA does.
When was the last time you filed a document in a physical folder? Or used a physical clipboard? Have you ever found a physical bug in your computer?
These are all concepts that were once common in the real world, adopted to make computing more familiar and approachable. Whether the physical concepts are still in use is irrelevant. What matters is if the technology is useful, and email most certainly is. Claiming it should banned because some people misuse it is asinine. If anything should be banned because of misuse then it's surely social media, which is actually harmful to society.