On 2007-05-05 10:11:27 +0100, Graeme said:

In message , Andy Hall writes
On 2007-05-04 16:39:39 +0100, Graeme said:

Yes, it is.

No. They only "have" to do this because the law is the way that it
is. Laws can be changed or dumped entirely - they are a means to an
end, not a raison d'etre.

You are moving the goal posts

Nope - just discussing the subject in the broadest sense.


- the point of the discussion was the comparatively excellent service
RM provides, in spite of the built in handicaps which include the
requirement to deliver anywhere, for the same price.

Compared with what? The word "excellent" could only be used for
levels of comparison approaching zero.


A requirement not applicable to the competition. Yes, of course the
law can be changed, but, at the time of writing, it has not been.

A simple enough matter



True - but using a directory was faster!

Actually it was pretty good. I've used them a few times.

I didn't use Minitel, but did use Prestel extensively, and although it
was revolutionary at the time, it was S-L-O-W. When was that? 1970s?

That was because of the systems running it. Minitel was perfectly fine.



Another 10-15 years and I think that paper based mail services will be
largely irrelevant. Put it this way. I might buy more stock in
Fedex. I sure as hell wouldn't buy any in Royal Mail.

I'll archive that post for twenty years :-)

It's a pretty safe bet. Paper based mail in comparison with
electronic communication is largely already irrelevant.





Doubtless there were millions of people alive when buses were
introduced, and equally doubtless a great many of them went to their
graves never having used any form of motorised transport.

Of course. But nobody gave a second thought about introducing
motorised transport.

No-one gave a thought about introducing computers, home PCs, the
Internet, modems or broadband, but that does not mean that everyone is
capable of using them, any more than introducing motorised transport
automatically made everyone capable of driving.

Exactly. As they increasingly become the only thing available people
will either learn or won't be able to communicate and do other things.
It isn't going to alter the march of technology.




I should have said have access to. Most people have access to, via a
public library, but that does not provide the skill or confidence to
use it.

Once again the mentality that there needs to be some kind of public
sector involvement in provisioning of this kind of thing. All the
time that there are these attempts to spoon feed people rather poorly,
they won't take responsibility for themselves. As soon as they have
to make their own arrangements, they will.

Let us return to your motorised transport theme. You would be happy
for anyone and everyone to have access to such transport, without any
form of training? You would expect anyone to be able to climb behind
the wheel of a vehicle, and intuitively know how to drive? No, you
would not. Ordinary people have no more idea about computers than they
have about driving. Instruction is required - there was no mention of
free instruction, or spoon feeding.

No. *Instruction* isn't required. *Learning* is.

Actually one can use the driving analogy to a limited extent.

The requirement, in order to drive on the public roads is to pass a
prescribed test. There is no requirement to go to a driving school
for instructor based training, although many people do. Other people
go out supervised by someone with a license, while others with access
to private land can drive around on their own and teach themselves if
they so choose.