XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science
From: jclarkeusenet@cox.net
In article ,
leszek.karlik@gmail.com says...
>
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 22:10:58 +0100, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> wrote:
>
> [...]
> > Big difference: I can quite literally sample the book. I can tell how
> > it "tastes". I cannot do that with an online grocery.
>
> You can taste an apple in a supermarket and then leave it half-bitten when
> it turns out you don't like the taste? Around here, eating the goods before
> purchasing them seems to be frowned upon.
Books are not subject to bruising, rot, insufficient ripening, excessive
ripening, or any of the other things that can go wrong with apples.
Only people who either don't eat fresh food or who are not the buyers of
fresh food in the household think that this is something that should be
trusted to the jugdment of others.
I remember a discussion a while back with someone who utterly shocked to
find that his kitchen contained a very high grade knife with a sharp
point and a 12 inch blade. He never imagined that anyone would have a
legitimate use for such a thing.
> [...]
> > But not for me, and I doubt it ever will be. If I'm in a restaurant,
> > I'm paying a rather steep premium for someone to pick my food
> > ingredients... and I have an IMMEDIATE ability to tell them if they've
> > screwed up and get it fixed.
> >
> > Not so with remote order and delivery.
>
> That's why nobody ever orders pizza remotely, right? Or oriental food. Or
> sushi.
Prepared food is not fresh produce.
> Because screw convenience, this model will never take off since some people
> will want to be able to IMMEDIATELY tell the cook they've screwed off.
>
> Which is why we don't have the ability to buy food remotely. A pity, I
> would
> really think such an option would be convenient for some people. Well,
> maybe
> in the future, these are SF groups after all :-)
We can buy food remotely. There is nothing new about this. My neighbor
does it regularly.
> [...]
> > Doubly useless for delivering food; food spoils, and generally I want
> > my food NOW. I don't know what I'll be using in two weeks. I know what
> > I'll be using tonight, and maybe a couple days from now. When I go
> > shopping,I get exactly what I want, including getting *that* apple
> > instead of *this* apple, and I get it right away, and control the
> > delivery thereof.
>
> Has it occurred to you that you simply might not be a target of the "remote
> delivery" business model?
Tell that to the person who has been touting it as such.
> This doesn't mean that it won't be popular,
> unless
> you consider yourself to be a perfect representative of the majority of
> customers available on the market.
If it can be done without adding cost then it will become popular.
Amazon works because cost including shipping is low enough to be
competitive and their selection on books is larger than any retail
store.
When you go to buy food from them though you will find that you can't
buy two cans of something, you have to buy a case, unless it's a very
expensive luxury item.
> > Now, give me a matter replicator (a 3D printer capable of nanoscale
> > manufacturing from any materials) and designs for top-quality food, now
> > you're talking.
>
> Meh, I'm not sure if I'd want to eat food from a matter replicator. Who's
> to guarantee that the design is not spiked with some nasty chemicals by
> some pranksters or cyberterrorists?
>
> I can't scrutinize the molecular design of replicator "food", molecule by
> molecule. Give me old-fashioned grown food stamped by the FDA (or
> equivalent) anytime.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
