Right, photography. A lot has happened in the last few years. Are
there any plans to update your digital vs. film articles?

I'm thinking of buying a Pentax K10D. Are you familiar with it?
One reason is that I can use some old but good lenses I have
(the Pentax SLR digital cameras work with all Pentax lenses),
though the FOV is smaller (or focal length increased, depending
on one's point of view). It's also gotten reviews, and seems
about right for me (serious amateur). You mentioned some arguments
in favour of digital: shoot like a pro and keep just the good shots,
change ISO on the fly, no fiddling with negatives, originals are
available in high resolution (possible with negatives but only
with expensive scanning, not the relatively low-res scanning one
can get done parallel with development at most places), one can
produce an image quickly (say, to sell something on Ebay) quickly.
The main drawback, for many people, including myself, until recently
was resolution. (You mention reciprocity failure, lack of bleeding
etc as advantages of film, but these are needed only in special
situations.) At 10 MP, however, resolution is comparable to standard
35mm film and thus good enough for even moderately large blow-ups.

So, for the serious amatuer photographer who, however, has more or
less normal lighting in his shots, any reason NOT to purchase a
10 MP digital camera? Any reason to want more or fewer pixels?
Any reason not to purchase the K10D, which seems to have a lot
of bang for the buck? Any real reason to wait for the K20D?