Because the Communications of the ACM<\/a> has so much surprisingly good writing, it has become one of my favorite periodicals.\u00c2\u00a0 (I say surprisingly because CACM is a technical journal.)\u00c2\u00a0 Though the journal is aimed primarily at computer scientists, much of the content is accessible to a wider audience.\u00c2\u00a0 Take, for example,\u00c2\u00a0 \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Mightier than the pen<\/a>.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Communications of the ACM<\/span> 52, no. 12 (12, 2009): 112.\u00c2\u00a0 [closed access, alas], Joe Haldeman's essay on how the complex relationship he has as a writer with both the computer and pen and paper.\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 I got such a kick out of the essay that I was moved to submit the following comment to the piece:<\/p>\n I identify very much with Joe Haldeman's \"collaboration between pen and computer\".\u00c2\u00a0 I had to think twice about whether I'd make the same hard decision of computer over pen if one had to choose one and concluded that yes, I'd do the same.\u00c2\u00a0 I would have wanted to read more about what Mr. Haldeman thinks a world of computers without \"a fountain pen [writing] into a bound blank book\" would be like.\u00c2\u00a0 It was only after a family member gave me my first Moleskine journal that I rediscovered what I had lost when I wrote almost exclusively on a computer.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Because the Communications of the ACM has so much surprisingly good writing, it has become one of my favorite periodicals.\u00c2\u00a0 (I say surprisingly because CACM is a technical journal.)\u00c2\u00a0 Though the journal is aimed primarily at computer scientists, much of … Continue reading