. . . that read a bit like Luddite screed against technology in general, save for the middle portion where technology was briefly embraced for the sake of instantly copyrighting works. I don't mean that in an insulting way, just that after reading the piece I left with a feeling of
"Here's a guy who isn't a fan of technology, and in fact, seems to suspect it has a malevolent nature."
Had I been the interviewer, I would've posed this additional question:
Addressing your concern about the "danger, if we rely too heavily on digital storage of information, that we will lose it" . . . how would you square these fears against, say, the loss of the Library at Alexandria? In other words, since there are no permanent mediums on which text can be recorded (even stone weathers over time), what makes text recorded on paper superior to digital text?