XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science
From: rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com
"Robert Bannister" wrote in message
news:bjp27aFhjjdU2@mid.individual.net...
> On 16/01/2014 2:02 am, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>> On 1/15/14 12:54 PM, Doc O'Leary wrote:
>>> In article ,
>>> "sna" wrote:
>>>
>>>> "J. Clarke" wrote in message
>>>> news:MPG.2d3b71dbee74782498a35e@news.newsguy.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> When the train can take me from my garage to my office and stop off
>>>>> for
>>>>> groceries on the way home, all on my schedule, without my having to
>>>>> walk
>>>>> several blocks in the snow at each end or make several transfers, get
>>>>> back to me.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, that one is never going to happen, even with the pod system.
>>>
>>> Only a fool would imagine that's a good idea in the first place. Part
>>> of the beauty of a "pod" system is that it can not only abstract a
>>> transporter, but a replicator as well. You need groceries? You push a
>>> few buttons and it all gets sent *to* you! Hell, we already have
>>> approximations of this with companies like Amazon.
>>
>>
>> Not even vaguely close. I do my shopping in person because there is
>> no way I'm trusting some guy I don't know to check every piece of
>> produce and make sure it's in good shape, and even if I did, do I trust
>> the shipping company or delivery people? No. The remote location
>> ordering approach is great for things like books, or gadgets, but not
>> for fresh food.
>
> Same with clothes. I have bought clothing on line, but I much prefer to be
> able to feel the material and to try the garment on.
But a free return system still allows that. Some just order all the
likely candidates and return the ones they choose not to own.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
