It would be even nicer if they were better at reporting facts.
For a circular area of Humor with radius Z. Best served fresh.
Most articles can be summed up in 3 or less factual sentences but nobody would read that.
I believe the journalist is actually making a damning, albeit poorly introduced, argument against the device as confronted to cultural expectations.
If these keyboards become widespread, it could become easy to mistakenly bin them, because “it is just paper” and it is not obvious that there is a potentially expensive coating and invisible circuit printed on it.
It is a similar argument to the one made against Bitcoin, in which it is all too easy to lose access to money because we hold a cultural habit to discard old hard drives – but now suddenly, they are also wallets containing potentially large sums.
Why do reporters still persist with these silly signoffs, that are actually wrong. ( They do it on the evening news as well as these pop science things). The paper you throw in the bin today is actually of no further use to anyone. Just like the glass of water you are drinking isn't going to be used to make hydrogen gas for a car, nor sandcastle you just built for silicon in the latest integrated circuit.