XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science   
   From: jclarkeusenet@cox.net   
      
   In article ,   
   droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com says...   
   >   
   > In article ,   
   >  Greg Goss  wrote:   
   >   
   > > "J. Clarke"  wrote:   
   > >   
   > > >In article ,   
   > > >droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com says...   
   > >   
   > > >> Such as system should see "pods" as simply cheap containers of a   
   > > >> standard size.  Essentially the $10 plastic storage totes we have today.   
   > > >> You'd have a stack of them that come and go with the deliveries/returns   
   > > >> that need to be made.  All you'd "summon" is a service that can shuttle   
   > > >> them between locations.  It's so straightforward I once planned a   
   > > >> similar thing as the basis for a bicycle delivery network.   
   > > >   
   > > >There is a technology in place already that implements this idea.  It is   
   > > >called a 'box'.   
   > >   
   > > I think he's aware of this.  He calls them "totes".   
   >   
   > Indeed; distinguished by the fact that they are boxes made to tote   
   > things around, which I expect everyone smarter than a rock understood.   
   > As I have often pointed out in this thread, most "futuristic" things   
   > (e.g., self-driving cars) are either dumb ways to do what has already   
   > been done (trains), make little sense in reality, or alter reality in   
   > such a way that our assumptions about the future need to be radically   
   > changed.   
      
   You have not demonstrated that self-driving cars are anything like   
   trains, you have just asserted it and expected everyone to agree with   
   you.  You have not demonstrated that self-driving cars "make little   
   sense in reality", just asserted it and expected everyone to agree with   
   you.  You have not demonstread that self-driving cars will "alter   
   reality in such away that our assumptions about the future need to be   
   radically changed", you have just asserted it and come up with some   
   bizarre notion of having a line of them running down every street in the   
   world every day at 10 minute intervals picking up and delivering "pods".   
      
   > So, no, totes/containerization isn't some radically new concept, but the   
   > application in logistics has been revolutionary.  For some reason,   
   > though, the buck stops at the retail store.   
      
   Yep, because a standard individual stackable shipping container for many   
   items will cost more than the item, further, the packaging for many   
   items must display the item and also display government-mandated   
   information about it.   
      
   > You could even say it stops   
   > sooner, because it's not like there is a "standard" size for a cereal   
   > box or whatever.   
      
   And there can't be unless most boxes are shipped partly full or the   
   weights vary widely--cereal is sold by weight not by volume and a pound   
   of grape nuts takes up a good deal less space than a pound of corn   
   flakes.   
      
   > And even though people *could* bring a sturdy   
   > container with them to do their shopping, most people still seem to bag   
   > things up.   
      
   Which tells you that people don't _want_ your standard containers.   
      
   > More to the point, if people aren't eager to make such   
   > straightforward changes as that, it doesn't bode well for even more   
   > futuristic thinking.   
      
   "Bizarre" != "Futuristic".  A real futurist looks for real   
   possibilities, not wild fantasied.  And human behavior is part of what   
   controls the real possibilites.  Technological feasibility is not the   
   only constraint you know, but many nerds don't understand that.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)