XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science
From: YourName@YourISP.com
In article J. Clarke wrote:
> In article , proto@panix.com
> says...
> > In article <170120141648063157%YourName@YourISP.com>,
> > Your Name wrote:
> > > In article , John F. Eldredge
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:16:02 +1300, Your Name wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Amazon, and others, are working on having smaller items delivered by
> > > > > autonomous flying drone (yet another reason flying cars are a silly
> > > > > idea) ... so expect your next book order to be "delivered" to the
> > > > > swimming pool in your neighbours back garden. ;-)
> > > >
> > > > One Facebook joke I have seen described the new Amazon drones as "skeet
> > > > shooting with prizes".
> > >
> > > I have no doubt some criminal scum have already thought of such things
> > > to intercept deliveries. :-( Just one of many reason why it's a
> > > rather ridiculous idea.
> >
> > It's not ridiculous in *all* situations, for example, it would be
> > perfect for deliveries to cattle stations in the Australian Outback
> > and perhaps some parts of the Arid Zone in the US.
> >
> > 5 seconds should be enough to show the lack of practicality in
> > Manhattan.
>
> The trouble is that little electric helicopters don't have the range to
> make deliveries to cattle stations in the Australian outback, but they
> do have the range to make deliveries in Manhattan.
Besides which, with the exception perhaps of emergency medical
supplies, to deliver all the goods for one cattle station in the
Australian outback would require thousands of drones.
Even Amazon delivering small items to one big city like Manhattan would
require many hundreds of the ugly things and by the time you add in
every other delivery service doing the same thing, you would barely see
the sky thanks to them clogging up the airspace.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
