XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science
From: droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com
In article ,
Robert Bannister wrote:
> On 16/01/2014 2:02 am, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> > On 1/15/14 12:54 PM, Doc O'Leary wrote:
> >>
> >> 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 then you have to wonder if there isn't some middle ground that
satisfies everyone. I mean, the illusion of produce selection is
*already* determined, in part, by what the store has out on display.
You could preview produce and refuse delivery if it didn't meet your
standards. You could try out clothing in one color or fabric, but order
it in another. At some point, it just gets easier to have the supply
chain stop at your house rather than at a store. We're not there yet,
but it gets closer every day.
--
iPhone apps that matter: http://appstore.subsume.com/
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, theremailer.net,
and probably your server, too.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
