XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science
From: dtravel@sonic.net
On 1/16/2014 6:28 PM, Robert Bannister wrote:
> On 17/01/2014 2:41 am, Doc O'Leary wrote:
>> In article ,
>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>>
>>> Doc O'Leary writes:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Again, such a future is a fool's dream. Like I said, if I work on the
>>>> 20th floor, it makes no sense for me to have a flying car that
>>>> forces me
>>>> land it and park some distance away, walk to my building, and then get
>>>> in an elevator to get me back up into the sky. That's stupid thinking
>>>> that fails to actually do the world building exercises that create a
>>>> believable future.
>>>
>>> Now Doc, everyone knows that you land on a small platform extended
>>> from the 20th floor and your flying car automatically folds up into a
>>> briefcase which you carry into your office with you.
>>
>> Keep in mind, though, that that *does* have a sliver of truth to it.
>> OK, so we won't be able to fold the vehicle down quite that much, but I
>> can easily see that building designs in a world with ubiquitous flight
>> would be different from building designs we have today. I expect most
>> of them would start the shift by designing more of them with elevators
>> on the outside of the building, which get gradually replaced by docking
>> stations where you can offload directly from your flying vehicle. Maybe
>> parking platforms on every level, sure. It all depends on what
>> technology is making things fly.
>>
>
> I suppose we would all have to have locks and bars or maybe even
> shutters on our windows to keep flying burglars out.
>
Some places already do have them. ;)
--
The 'Enterprise' crew in the 2009 Star Trek are adrenaline addicted,
hyper-active teenagers with ADD whose Ritalin got replaced with
methamphetamine, displaying a level of discipline that a Somali pirate
wouldn't tolerate.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
