Which regulation is it, exactly, that prevents shipping companies from paying to have pirates killed?
I have a pair of older mechanical typewriters. I don't use them to write (which I do professionally, albeit technically). I could see using them for pre-printed forms not available in PDF, but they're there mostly because I like the idea of having them more than they are useful (free/cheap garage sale fare). I might bring one with when I move; but I haven't ever even changed the ribbon in either of them.
I write mostly on the computer, but have written stories and drafts on paper even recently. Hell, if it's a line or two or an idea, I'll SMS it (with an old crappy cell phone, not iPhone/Blackberry/etc.) to my e-mail address. It's just a matter of what is available at the time. Words are words, regardless of how they are put in the particular order you put them in.
Also, if it's a long doc, I'll print it out and edit it by hand by scribbling on the page, then make the changes in the electronic file.
That being said, I like reading from paper, not an LCD screen, but I have been eyeing an e-book reader for a while now; too bad they all seem to have pesky DRM. It's just a matter of which one is the least evil.
>That said, I'd buy one of Burroughs's typewriters.
I would agree. And his stash of magazines he used for his cut-ups, too.
Offtopic? Troll? Funny? You be the judge!
Why limit ourselves to just one? I vote for all three! Only thing is you now lose twice the karma,
This picture also depicts the union of a sperm with an ova, indicating an extraordinary insight into human reproduction.
and then
I postulate that Leonardo da Vinci wrote the Voynich Manuscript circa 1460 when he was about 8 years old.
An early microscope was made in 1590 in Middelburg, The Netherlands.
How exactly did a youthful da Vinci figure out what an ova and sperm look like? If Leonardo da Vinci (as a child) could sketch sperm and ova over 100 years before a crude microscope was invented and almost 200 years before Hooke and Leeuwenhoek, then that alone would be an astonishingly significant discovery. Unfortunately, it seems unlikely that Leonardo would build a microscope, discover cell biology, and not bother to write something up about it as an adult. He was, after all, interested in pretty much everything. The more reasonable conclusion is that Edith Sherwood is willing to interpret images very "liberally" (meaning here, without much evidence), without making even simple checks for logical consistency. This is a single example, but the carelessness calls the rest into question. (As you have already indicated)
Also, shipping companies don't lose when their ships are boarded or the goods stolen, as they're all insured. Everyone knows this, even the pirates. The ones who lose are the insurance companies, but they don't really care either coz they just make up for it in higher premiums.
Piracy! It's a win for all!
Genius. I bet you don't lose when your car is stolen, because you are all insured?
They don't *have* to, but it makes sense (for logical, ethical and legal reasons).
Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky