From: usenet@only.tnx   
      
   On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 04:09:36 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein    
   wrote:   
   >In <608b7f79.1991954@news.dslextreme.com> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes:   
   >   
   >>to perform that task.  The way I see it, limited drone delivery may ease the   
   >>hardship of living in the boondocks, but they are not a replacement for good   
   >>roads to an area that otherwise has the ability to finance their   
   construction.   
   >   
   >Again, though, if 3/4 of the trips (i.e. going to town to pick   
   >up a dozen eggs, a half gallon of ice cream, three packs of   
   >cigarettes, etc..) can be eliminated, the remaining 1/4 can   
   >be handled by roads a lot less substantial and expensive.   
      
   I guess I've been envisioning more impoverished areas, ones that don't even   
   have   
   much in the way of towns or a population that can afford ice cream.   
      
      
   >Both from the reduced traffic and ... that people will put   
   >up with marginal roads a lot more if they only take them   
   >once/week instead of twice a day.   
   >   
   >For example, I run into a lot of unpaved and even depaved[a]   
   >roads.  I'd be pissed as hell if I had to do a five mile   
   >trip on them twice/day. But once/week?  Not so bad.   
      
   Why wait for drones?  Why aren't helicopters and planes a sufficient   
   replacement   
   for roads across Africa today?   
      
   We have the obvious example of Alaska, where in some cases building roads is a   
   practical impossibility, and planes provide the biggest link for commerce and   
   travel.  Would these communities rather have roads if it were feasible?   
      
   --   
   She lit a burner on the stove and offered me a pipe   
   "I thought you'd never say hello," she said, "you look like the silent type."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)