Page Summary
Active Entries
- 1: Interesting Links for 21-04-2025
- 2: Interesting Links for 22-04-2025
- 3: Interesting Links for 20-04-2025
- 4: Photo cross-post
- 5: Interesting Links for 18-04-2025
- 6: A thought about the transgender court case - and the ECHR
- 7: Interesting Links for 19-04-2025
- 8: Review: Planet of Lana
- 9: A brief summary of the Transgender/Equality Act court case
- 10: A thing I wish Google Maps could do
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 11:28 am (UTC)Why postal services aren't all feverishly working out how to perfect this is beyond me. They're all losing business due to people switching from paper to electronic mail, while at the same time people are buying more and more stuff online to be delivered direct to their door. And the latter falls down because letter boxes weren't designed to securely accept parcels. Upgrade the letter boxes to secure 'parcel boxes' and the postal service becomes highly useful again.
no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 11:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 12:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 05:16 pm (UTC)There's a shopping centre about a five minute walk from here. Putting a bunch of lockers there would make them handy for several thousand people.
no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 08:04 pm (UTC)My guess is only Americans will 'get' this. It's why they were the first with drive-in movies, drive-thru check-outs, pizzas delivered cooked to your front door and, of course, ATM machines. (Just guessing for each of those, but I'm sure it's mostly right.) Service matters, and there's money in it.
no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 10:02 pm (UTC)I shouldn't have to reserve a PO Box for my general use. The whole point of the Amazon approach is that when a parcel arrives it is put into an empty box, and I collect it from there. I have access to that box for as long as it has my parcel in it, and then it will be used for the next person. One box per person would be horribly inefficient.
no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 10:31 pm (UTC)It's one of the technical problems that have to be worked out. It'd need a hole to receive the parcel, which would then be checked by machine and accepted or rejected as the case may be. ie. Place parcel in hole. Door on hole closes. Machine checks parcel and either says 'Thank you.' and moves parcel to another compartment before opening the hole door again, or it just opens hole door and says 'Take it back please - I'm not expecting this.'
Size will always be a problem, as there'll always be a parcel that's bigger than your box's door. So expect different box sizes to suit different needs and budgets. And the early adopters will be people who want the convenience of such a service and damn the expense.
no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 09:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 01:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 10:04 am (UTC)... Namecheck on all but name to A Game of Thrones?
no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 11:11 am (UTC)I was amazed at so many people failed to notice how completely safe NP is after all that. Sadly, it seems that the only party that supports NP these days is Conservative. Meh.
no subject
Date: 2011-09-11 09:50 am (UTC)There also seems to be a lot of FUD in Japan about NP and Fukushima at the moment. There a a good article in the Guardian Weekend yesterday.
no subject
Date: 2011-09-10 07:19 pm (UTC)Granted, other writers hand wave, I'm sure, but this just doesn't work as an analysis of Tolkien. You don't have to mention everything explicitly to make it work, but you do need to create the illusion of a breathing world that'll support the assumption that things like button making equipment exists. And if there's anyone who made for a convincing world builder, Tolkien is it.