Some thoughts about the conversion from snail-mail to e-mail.

Introduction:

The Finnish postal service has started a test to scan normal mail and deliver it as e-mail.

Letters will be opened in the post office, scanned and send as e-mail to the recipient. The letter itself will be delivered too, but the delivery will be limited till 2 times a week instead of five.

Benefits:

It is obvious that this system has some benefits. Not only is it more efficient (scanning a letter is less work than delivering it, especially if much of the process is automated), but the reduced delivery scheme cuts the fuel consumption (and CO₂ emissions). A good thing for the environment.

And it is to be expected that scanned letters will more often lead to e-mailed answers, reducing the need for the classical postal service even further. It is another step on the way to paperless communications.

Potential problems:

Off course there is always a backside to a coin.

• Not everyone has a computer or an e-mail address. They will suffer from the reduced delivery schedule.

• Not every letter/parcel is suitable for e-mail delivery. Again a reduction of service has to be feared.

• Express/fast (first class) deliveries are not possible unless additional measures are taken (extra costs for the sender?)

Privacy and legal concerns:

One of the major arguments against filtering of Internet traffic is that it is like opening normal letters by the post office. The integrity of ones mail is the holy grail of privacy. And that is exactly what is happening now. Off course there will be rules and regulations and personnel will be scanned. But the letters will be opened and the recipient cannot determine if they are read and/or misused. He just has to trust the system. And we all know the system will fail. Lets hope it will remain an exception.

Unfortunately the Internet is not a very safe place. Mailboxes are often corrupted and used for illegal purposes (spam, scams, identity fraud,...). In short your e-mail is not safe. When more important and sensitive information enters your mailbox, it becomes more attractive for scammers to harvest this information and use it for their illegal purposes. Off course they can intercept your snail mail too, but at least you would know the post has been opened. And they would need a physical presence en route. Internet information can be harvested anywhere in the world and in much greater quantities.

And what about confidential information? If information is leaked, who should be blamed?

When letters are opened, the confidentiality is compromised. Will this lead to a new (private?) postal service that deals with “for your eyes only” type of mail?

The country side:

A reduced delivery schedule will have the greatest impact in the countryside. There is no door to door delivery of leaflets, newspapers and so on, everything is delivered by the postman. The delivery of the daily newspapers alone will consume all the economic and environmental gains from the reduced mail delivery. (the majority of the aging country side population has no computer, they depend on their local newspapers)

There are also no mailboxes in the countryside. Outgoing mail is collected by the mailman during his delivery tour. So country side mail will face a double delay, once during collection and once during delivery.

Maybe it is a solution to collect your mail at the local post office? They phone if there is mail and you collect it while shopping. It would indeed be a workable solution if they hadn't closed down all the small post offices in the country side.

The verdict:

From my list of negative argument you may not conclude that I oppose this idea. No, I think it is a development that cannot and should not be stopped. But the problems I mentioned indicate that it is not smooth sailing. The test will help to solve the technical problems. But it is the social problems that need the most attention. I just hope the economic benefits will not make the policy makers blind for the social aspects.

Rinso

Excess and Quality of Life

Incidentally, I ran into this video, which sums my thoughts on modern society and then some. The statistics are from the US, but inside what he says is something that affects us all globally. Enjoy the video!

Modern Living and Exhaustion

Too many things to do, and too exhausted to do most of them.  Sound familiar?

Living in a metropolis means there is a lot going on everyday.  Many consider this to be the main advantage of living in a city – the vibrancy, the nightlife, the convenience.  But I can’t help thinking we as people, are becoming more and more stressed due to modern society. 

It’s not so much the city itself, the cluster, or the proximity to anonymous others (which may also cause stress) – It seems very much just the way things function in modern life.  In a concrete jungle, our priorities are different, and in fact, too many priorities might be the reason living is so stressful in modern day environments.

The bombardment of advertising, media, ideals.  Every day you see a billboard with a woman so glamorous, so vogue.  An illusion most of the time: unattainable, so far from uniqueness of you, but inserted into every blank space of our everyday lives that it becomes the ideal you.  Being out of fashion or beauty becomes shameful.  Being old becomes embarrassing – lines and signs that you must hide.  We start to live for what we see: mirrors of illusions.

No doubt in every inch of society and our social lives we come under constant scrutiny and judgment, that it is hard to relax.   When its not coming from directly from a person, it will come from some form of media.  It’s a relaxing day when I can just shut all all the unwanted messages and let my mind breathe again.

What I like doing when I want a really peaceful day is to shut everything off.  Phone, internet, computer.  It’s not restricted to only that.  Newspapers, distractions.  And then I just go do something wordless, like draw, or go for a walk.  And if I do use words, it should be some I write myself.  The worst problem is when I hear some garbage lyrics from a pop song in my head, because its hard to get out.  I just want to listen to quietness, and birds chirping.  Then I realise life is beautiful and special, and that there is a sense of calm to be found under the modern madness.

Quality of life

With the ever improving knowledge and technology one might expect an ever improving standard of living. But does that also means an improved quality of life?

I dare to say no, on the contrary. I rather think that modern developments often have consequences that make our life a little more complicated and less joyful.

Let's take Europe. The EU is meant to make things better for us. Easier border crossings, availability of foreign products, uniform rules, less red tape. But do the people really benefit? Europe without borders means you can forget about your passport. But instead you have to prove your identity at almost every official transaction. Since criminals can now move freely in Europe, everybody has become a potential criminal and has to be checked at every critical transaction.

Also products can be traded freely within the EU. No more restrictions for products from other member states. But standards between 27 countries are a compromise. High standards are lowered, low standards are upgraded. In a lot of fields Finland has (had) high standards, but we had to accept the compromise. And some standards were specific for the Nordic situation. The least dense populated country in Europe has completely different problems and solutions than a country with fast urbanized areas.

So is the EU influencing your quality of life? Yes. Is it always for the good? No, many EU decisions forces you to adapt, often in a way you don't really like.

The digital age is making your life easier, right?

Instead of a machine with a simple on/off switch, you can now program it and let it do whatever you want. Unfortunately you have to carry the manuals and your reading glasses around all the time. E-book readers let you carry your whole library in your handbag. Unfortunately half the books you want to read are published in a different format and you have to buy a different e-book reader for them. And you can conduct all your business via Internet. Until your computer is hacked and your passwords are stolen. Than your main concern is limiting the damage and getting a new bank account.

As the Internet has opened the world for you, so it has for businesses. Glottalization has got a big boost in the past decade. Companies compete on international scale, but the small local businesses have a hard time to survive. And when they disappear, your choice in products and services is diminished. To survive in this game, you need to be where the action is; the urbanized areas. And with the concentration of businesses and work in the cities, the rural areas depopulate. Less people in the countryside villages means less tax income and less local services as a result. Village schools are closing in an alarming rate. Off course there is a point where it is no longer sensible to keep a village school open. But financial arguments are leading in the discussions, not the interest of the population.

These are just a few random thoughts about the "benefits" of our modern times. Often people are not aware of the consequences of new legislations and developments. We will try (in our modest way) to increase the awareness with the public and the politicians.

Rinso