Dark Age Messengers

By | November 22, 2011

image

Maybe I’m missing something, of I’ve been taken in by those TV ads of guys walking across stepping stones made out of frogmens’ skulls, but I expect the big couriers to be somewhat snappier and higher-tech these days. Not based on today’s experience:

  • Call their hotline to get a guy in either Mexico or the Philippines (based on accent, and he wasn’t saying) who scolded me for giving the second line of the address first, and then refused to accept the package as documents when I told him it was a book (it’s actually a pile of edited pages, so I guess it could be either.) Stoopid that I am, I didn’t realise the huge difference (commercial invoice in triplicate and duties for one, nothing for the other) and should have said “documents” when he asked me. So that session was a bust.
  • My colleague, the recipient and courier account holder tried the other end, and we got somewhere, though both of us still had to give the details twice, including something called a “control number” (I’ve just been watching Terry Gilliams’s Brazil so I’m on the lookout for things like this) to “smoothen things out”.
  • Of course when the guy came there were no documents, no smoothing things out, so we had to do everything by hand. All nine sections. Good luck to whoever has to decipher my atrocious handwriting. We’ll be lucky if the package makes it before Christmas.

So, questions:

What happened to those handheld computers that couriers were using a few years ago to do all this? Wouldn’t it be easier? Just type out the details or input them from Central Service — the guy with the van already has my address, presumably, unless he just drove around knocking on everyone’s doors, and as the recipient is the one being billed, presumably all they need is his account number for all those details to pop into the appropriate fields.

And then don’t get me started on the whole “give-me-your-details-over-the-phone-and-can-you-spell-your-name-again-is-it-German-no-it’s-not-it’s-English-like-Shakespeare” (not that I have anything against German names) thing. Why can’t we do this any better?

Off the top of my head, type “Fedex” or “UPS” into Skype and you’re instantly connected to customer service where you can type your details in so they won’t be misheard, and you don’t have to sit on the line listening to “Rhinestone Cowboy” on a loop (actually it was worse; I think it was “Honey” by Bobby Goldsboro).

I’d be up for a USB dongle that the guy carries, and the customer slips into their computer (who doesn’t have one sitting around these days?) and a little courier program pops up so the user can fill in the details from their laptop or desktop. He just plugs it into his handheld device and the data zips across and self-checks. Courier guys could carry round free branded ones and hand them out as promotional items and so customers can fill out the fields in advance.

Or if that’s too complicated, going to the website and opening up a chat box with a customer representative. (I’ve just checked Fedex’s customer support page and it involves filling out 14 different fields. And don’t try to sidestep any:

image

Yeah, I’m going to fill all those in.

Maybe these courier firms are smarter in other parts of the world, but I didn’t come away feeling impressed. I’m sure their package tracking systems are second to none — i.e. once the atoms are in the system. But it seems that the burden is still being passed to the customer, when it could be so much less painful for both parties if it was electronic.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Tony’s Camera

By | November 22, 2011

Tony’s Camera
Originally uploaded by Loose Wire.

How many people, I wonder, have had this experience: a nightmare with a smartphone and a return to trusty basics. My friend Tony has a BlackBerry, but this is his phone of choice, and after his N91 died in midflight (literally) he decided he wouldn’t take a chance on a phone being anything more than a phone anymore. This ancient museum-piece is now his main phone and he’s very happy with it. And he being in telecoms too!

Reflecting On Yourself

By | November 22, 2011

Reflecting On Yourself
Originally uploaded by Loose Wire.

Why are people so easily absorbed by their own reflection? Is it narcissism, or do we tend to face the transport that we await? Is it easier to look at ourselves than at other people? Are people thinking about themselves when they look, or are they critically appraising their looks? Why don’t we feel self-conscious gazing at our reflections in public? Why do men do it as much as women?

How Reliable Is Google Maps?

By | November 22, 2011

image

Was looking for a Singapore hotel this morning on Google Maps, which would seem to be a good place to start, and was perturbed to find it flagged in five different places, most of them several streets apart (above). These are all links from companies advertising rooms. So you’d think they would try to get it right. (Amusingly, the sponsored link at the top is for a hotel of the same name in Vancouver, which is slightly further down the road and across several oceans):

image

So, some ways to go, I suspect, before the era of ubiquitous searchability and and mobile findability, or whatever it’s called.

My First LinkedIn Spam

By | November 22, 2011

 image

Got my first LinkedIn spam today:

Hi Jeremy,

[name deleted], here… we are linked on LinkedIn

I know you’re interested in earning an in~come on the internet. I also know you probably wouldn’t mind if ‘understanding it’ was made easier for you.

Well, I’ve been notified about a new F.REE report by internet marketers, [etc ad nauseam]

I logged in, and it’s true: We are linked on LinkedIn. Or were; I’ve deleted him as quickly as I could. Or at least I tried to: There’s no easy way to do it. (I found the answer, not in LinkedIn’s answers or help page, but on Ask Dave Taylor, who points out that “with so many different social network sites cropping up, it’s pretty amazing to me how few actually let you edit the connections you establish.”

image

My policy with LinkedIn has been to add more or less anyone who asks to be linked. This is highly irresponsible of me, of course, but I figured it wasn’t going to do any damage since I don’t really use the tool. Now, after this bit of spam, I’m not so sure. If people see I’m connected to a spammer, maybe that could do me some damage. As I’ve never received a job offer, or even an indecent proposal, via LinkedIn I’m frankly not quite sure what it’s for. But if it’s a way for people to spam me then I’m all for tightening the guest list a bit.

So I’m going to start weeding out my LinkedIn contact list, which currently stands at about three gazillion people, only four of whom I’ve actually met.