Finland To Try Scanning Snail Mail 152
will_die writes "In an effort to cut carbon emissions and reduce costs, Finland's postal company, Itella, has begun a pilot program wherein snail-mail letters are converted into PDFs and made viewable online by their addressees, instead or in advance of physical delivery. The effort is volunteer only — a little over 100 people and around 20 business as of last month — but it has already sparked concerns in Finland about privacy and government overreach. The volunteers will have images of all their letters viewable on a computer or phone. The postman will still arrive twice a week to deliver the scanned letters, as well as any packages or attachments. Additionally, the postal service will filter out junk mail."
Kind of like something that already exists... (Score:3, Interesting)
... but no one cares. (since it's too long to title as such.)
This seems like Zumbox on crack.
While the idea of receiving mail digitally has some appeal to me, forcing everyone to receive mail originally sent in a non-digital format as a set of 1s and 0s is... not quite the best idea.
I wouldn't mind receiving my electric, water, and cable bill as a digital sending each month (and I already do via email), but certain things (bills from collections agencies come to mind) are things that I, and ONLY I need to see.
Now, with something like this, if the ability to respond electronically to the mail were there and available to us, even if there's some sort of digital postage (at a reduced cost, preferably, if we choose to not send a dead tree copy of the same letter) that was needed, maybe it would start to appeal to more.
Best case for that would be when my doctor sends me paperwork to fill out before I come in. If I can log into a secure server, receive the forms, type in the data (memo: we need to have something other than Adobe for forms, ffs. Plain old HTML forms should be fine), and submit that electronically...
If the doctor needs a dead tree version at that point, they can print it.
Re:Kind of like something that already exists... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Kind of like something that already exists... (Score:3, Insightful)
I believe you are amazingly shortsighted that you think postal systems are irrelevant. Can you think of any other completely effective way to physically deliver large quantities of physical items to households covering a large geographical area, without the expense of storefronts etc?
I quite disagree that postal systems are dieing - I believe that in this day of internet shopping postal systems are becoming far more widely utilized than ever.
Re:Kind of like something that already exists... (Score:2)
Re:Kind of like something that already exists... (Score:2)
The USPS is completely self-sustaining and has been since the 1980s (although back then, yes, it was a money hole). It receives no funding from taxes.
I would say USPS is not subsidized, except that you are right about the monopoly on letter post. The law itself is interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Express_Statutes [wikipedia.org]
From my experience and tales from others, USPS is far superior to Canada's privatized post, so I am suspicious about the social value of privatizing the mail.
Re:Kind of like something that already exists... (Score:2)
UPS/FedEx? That's their business. The USPS (and a lot of other postal systems throughout the world) has been putting more emphasis on their 'added services' like package shipping and money transfers to adjust for the diminishing returns of snail mail delivery. I actually get mad when people send me snail mail letters on dead tree - it's bad for the environment and e-mail is a lot simpler and easier.
Re:Kind of like something that already exists... (Score:2)
Obligatory quote: I think you're severely underestimating the bandwidth of a 747 full of BluRay discs.
Other than that, I like to receive some mail in pre-printed, signed and ready-to-archive-forever version. Preferably when larger sums of money is involved.
And I like the peace of mind knowing that no ECHELON or whatever read my mail. GPG-encrypted email would work, but I can't even get my coworkers to use that, let alone mom and grandma.
Until Big Government is cut back far enough to actually respect email privacy as good as snail mail, I'm counting on the dead tree envelope. Both are protected by the constitution, but somehow They only care about paper security.
Re:Kind of like something that already exists... (Score:2)
It's actually like Earth Class Mail [earthclassmail.com], which scans your mail, and has a government postal service outsource program. Notably, they do this for Swiss Post [arstechnica.com].
After reading Zumbox's site, I'm still trying to figure out why I would open an account there. It seems not only do I have to sign up for it, all my service providers do too. If my electric company is too dumb to offer e-bills, why would they offer this?
ORLY? (Score:2, Informative)
april fools...
Why not? (Score:2)
Why not? What comes in by snail mail today?
And they're filtering out the junk mail!
Re:Why not? (Score:3, Informative)
And if you get a birthday card with money in it? Who is to say you didn't get two 20's in that letter. The postal service was only able to locate one of those!
Or, say it's a private letter about financial information and now they have all your account information, oh and all your other personally identifiable information was in other letters that week so your identity is safe with you, and the person that opened all your mail.
It's just not a good idea in the long run. Maybe as an opt-in service for those who _know_ what is/isn't showing up in snail mail?
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
I've gotten one piece of non-junk mail in the last year. I'll happily tell people not to send money in exchange for cutting off the junk. Who the hell mails cash instead of a check anyway?
Re:Why not? (Score:1)
Grandmothers. Grandpas. Aunts. Uncles. The people who aren't close enough to you to care, and not with-it enough to do robust things like check, credit transfer, or god-forbid, an actual thoughtful gift. ^^;
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Oh I think money is plenty thoughtful- they're thoughtful enough to let me get something I want, rather than guessing wrong. But hasn't the post office warned people for decades not to send cash by mail?
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Don't everyone's grandparents put steganographic checksums for enclosed money in the text of their letter? :P
Re:Why not? (Score:3, Funny)
Don't everyone's grandparents put steganographic checksums for enclosed money in the text of their letter? :P
Who's your Grandfather? Alan Turing?
Oh wait...
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Its no more likely to happen with it being done this way than it currently is.
Its really not hard to open an envelope, fuck with the contents, and reseal it without anyone noticing after the fact.
The fact that the places that are going to be doing this are most certainly monitored to all hell and back like most postal sorting facilities already are.
You are being paranoid about a problem that would already exist if it were actually going to be a problem.
Like it or not, this is the way things are going. The transition is going to happen and when it does there are going to be initial issues that need to be worked out, but thats not an excuse for not doing it.
The pony express riders could read your mail and steal your money too, far easier than now where most of the work is done by machines rather than hands on by people ... but it was still a good thing to have wasn't it?
People have always had their hands on your mail and had this ability. They've had scanners for years that would make it easy to spot money in something and to stick that one aside. Hell, a hand held high power UV light in your palm being held over the envelopes will get you enough of a reflection to detect the plastic strip in american bills so you only have to open the ones with money in them, making it pretty much identical to this in every way. If you trust your mailman, this is no different, he can already do this if he wants to.
Fortunately, most people find it easier to just do their job than to try and scam people via the mail and end up in a federal prison ... at least here in the states. I doubt its really that much different in Finland.
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
And if you get a birthday card with money in it? Who is to say you didn't get two 20's in that letter. The postal service was only able to locate one of those!
RTFA. It says the system is voluntary. If you send money in your birthday card (and it is never a good idea to send cash in the mail), then don't volunteer to have that piece of mail scanned!
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
"RTFA. It says the system is voluntary. If you send money in your birthday card (and it is never a good idea to send cash in the mail), then don't volunteer to have that piece of mail scanned!"
RTFA yourself. The system is currently voluntary for the recipient, for whom all of their mail will be scanned. It's neither (1) optable by the sender, nor (2) optable per piece of mail. On top of all that, this is a test for a universal (presumably non-optable) rollout.
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
RTFA yourself. The system is currently voluntary for the recipient, for whom all of their mail will be scanned.
Well, it's the recipient who would be out the twenty bucks, so I think my point still stands.
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
You are not supposed to send money over mail in Finland. Post's own web pages says that it is forbidden. There's no law about it though (in Finland we have laws about almost everything!)
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
You need a better shredder. And no, no business grade. $40 at OfficeMax, and it eats cred cards, CD's, anything. I don't even open the junk mail..just shove the whole envelope in.
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
4. Checks
5. Legally binding documents (i.e titles, deeds, contracts)
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Bills from companies that you don't trust to handle online billing.
FTFY.
Bills in the mail aren't exclusively from companies that don't handle online billing. Some of us choose to continue with paper versions of bills because we do not trust putting our credit card and/or bank account information into commonly used, high profile websites on a monthly basis.
Re:Why not? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Why not? (Score:2)
Some of us choose to continue with paper versions of bills because we do not trust putting our credit card and/or bank account information into commonly used, high profile websites on a monthly basis.
Yet you choose to send paper checks through the mail that have your name, address, and bank routing/account number on them and are handled by god knows who many people along the way (postal employees, customer service reps accepting the payment at the destination, etc). Interesting. I think I'll stick to trusting the online method.
Sounds fine to me (Score:1)
Everything I really care about the security of (bank statements, personal messages etc) comes over the web, via TLS.
Re:Sounds fine to me (Score:2)
Dear So-and-so,
The results of your AIDS/STD tests are in.
Please contact us for a follow-up appointment ASAP.
Sincerely,
Your Doctor.
1 day ago (Score:1)
Re:1 day ago (Score:2)
Doesn't seem so. Following a few links through the article, they genuinely appear to have a site set up for receiving digital mail.
Requires either a user/pass set, or a (government issued? possibly as part of the ID?) smartcard read by the site to get logged in.
I'm nowhere near there, so I lack a user/pass or ID for login, but it seems to be legit.
Re:1 day ago (Score:2)
A derp-a-derp-derp.
Would help if I actually linked what I discovered.
From TFA, I followed a link over to a blog at the Telegraph [telegraph.co.uk] that contained links to the Netposti [netposti.fi] interface (link set to english. På svenska [netposti.fi], Suomeksi [netposti.fi] are options for .fi, .se).
What shows up after logging in, I have to leave to someone who actually has a login for the service. It'd be an expensive, expensive trip overseas just for me to get an answer (passport, plane, time off from work, sedatives, rental vehicle, ...), so I'll leave it to someone who might just be able to walk down the road and get set up.
Re:1 day ago (Score:2)
Finnish postal service already provides a service for companies, institutions, etc. to send mail electronically to the postal service, who print out the stuff and deliver the snail mail to the end clients. This probably does save a bunch of CO2, and makes life easier for said companies.
NetPosti you refer to is an interface for receiving such mail electronically, opting out of the snail mail part altogether. Possibly the scanning service uses the same interface.
The scanning service mostly sounds insane to me, but I could imagine someone already using NetPosti wanting to archive everything there. (Like images of the 20 euros your grandma sent you. Eh.) I guess the people would still receive the snail mail, but maybe in batches once or twice a week instead of every weekday.
I would prefer this... (Score:1, Interesting)
Finland has geographic issues (Score:5, Interesting)
Finland is really a very small country population-wise, but decently sized in landmass. Under 6M people in the 8th largest country in Europe. This has to make mail distribution very expensive. Add in the weather (I've been to northern Finland in February- well below 0 with snow banks over your head) and I can see why they'd want to minimize or eliminate physical delivery. Its barely economical in the US, I can't see how it could be there.
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
How does Norway manage 6 days of delivery then? The mountains in the middle certainly haven't impacted the postal service.
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:1)
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
8th largest country in Europe
Well okay but thats not very big by world standards.
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
8th largest country in Europe
Well okay but thats not very big by world standards.
A greater land area than Malaysia or the Philippines and nearly as big as Japan or the Congo is small by world standards.
Its not "very big" by world of Europeans standards, the point is that it has a small population relative to its size. Its population density is similar to that of New Zealand or Sudan. There are very few European or Asian countries with lower population densities, and its population density is much lower than India, or China or almost all other big countries (apart from Russia), so it is very lightly populated by world standards.
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
8th largest country in Europe
Well okay but thats not very big by world standards.
It's scarcely populated, even by world standards.
It has seven or eight times the population density of Australia and nowhere near the issues of distance which we face in au.
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
Well we have HOT (+60C isn't uncommon) and I have always felt that its easier to stay warm in the cold than cool in the heat but one thing we should agree on is that 1000km in the back country in AU or CA will be harder than 100km in the back country in Finland.
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
Finland has a lot of land that it's basically uninhabitable. Yes, Australia has lots of desert, but there your big problem is lack of water, not that it's basically impossible to build infrastructure there. Large areas of Finland are basically swampland because it's so wet.
There's no way to build roads, houses, or any kind of infrastructure on it due to the extreme ranges in temperature. Anything built on it would basically either sink, or the yearly rounds of freezing and thawing that cause massive ground expansion and contraction due to ice formation and ice melt, would tear anything built on it apart.
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:3, Insightful)
Because raising the price causes the demand for mail to go down. Perhaps enough so that you actually make less money than you would at the original price. Which when you have high fixed costs in employees and post offices or the startup cost is the driving factor in cost rather than the marginal cost of production, can actually mean you lose money by raising prices. Business can be weird. Like I said, mail is barely profitable in the US, and it only remains so do to high quantities of junk mail. In the past the post office has been subsidized by Congress. I can't imagine its profitable anywhere in Scandanavia.
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
Because raising the price causes the demand for mail to go down
Econfag here, ready to nitpick. Saying "demand goes down" implies that nobody wants mail delivery anymore, at any price. What you mean is that less is demanded at the higher price than the current price.
Like you say, raising prices can easily lead to less profit. But, how much more or less profit you make depends on the shape of the demand curve for mail delivery, not whether or not you have high variable costs or sunk costs. (Assuming you are still covering your marginal costs.) I'd suspect that the demand for mail delivery is rather inelastic; a slight bump in prices probably wouldn't cause people to boycott package delivery.
And if it's already unprofitable in Scandinavia, none of it matters anyway. If profit isn't the primary reason to provide mail delivery, the post office won't be disbanded because it was slightly less profitable this year than last.
Other than that, you have a point. You can't just ratchet up prices to a million dollars a package because you want to save money by "delivering" only scanned mail.
Re:Finland has geographic issues (Score:2)
Reliable postal service FOR ALL ADDRESSES is a public good.
I think it's entirely appropriate for the government to be in charge of it.
If I wanted to send a PDF, I would have (Score:2, Insightful)
I call bull on the "effort to cut carbon emissions" - this is purely about the costs and the carbon emissions are a byproduct (gas costs money). When I send a letter, I mean to send a letter. Not an electronic document. Now, this does not happen very often, so usually, I do communicate via email. I don't need the post office tampering with the mail. Furthermore:
"This (secure digital mailbox) is totally different from e-mail. It is comparable to web banking," said Tommi Tikka, development director at state-owned Itella, which runs the Nordic country's postal system.
So people's mail is stored on some server, probably totally unencrypted and requiring only a login to get in. Cue the hacking and government abuse - I can imagine it now; "We don't need a warrant, it's already in this database. People have no expectation of privacy when sending letters." (IANAL - or rather, "I Am Not A Finnish Lawyer" and really have no ideas of the laws in that country).
Luckily, this is all on a volunteer basis (for now), and I think from a cost-cutting perspective, it does make sense to reduce the number of deliveries by postman for non-express mail to twice a week since the volume of mail has probably shrunk (I have no statistics for this, solely based on personal experience).
Junk Mail (Score:4, Interesting)
Government: I guess it was mis-tagged as junk mail. Our bad. Sorry it's already been deleted. No, we don't back up junk mail.
Re:Junk Mail (Score:1, Flamebait)
The government doesn't interfere with such things.
They just log them, copy them, pass the copy along to the analysts, and deliver the mail, so as not to arouse the suspicions of people who are already paranoid.
(Kids, if you think there's any reason in the world for the US Government to be running a delivery service, other than that it simplifies intelligence gathering immensely, then you probably didn't go to business school.)
Re:Junk Mail (Score:2)
The stories of a toad like Franklin being a "ladies man" while in France mirror the stories of Henry Kissinger flying hotties on dates to Paris, which was later admitted to be a cover for Kissinger attending secret peace talks there with the Viet Namese.
So, while your sarcastic reply is not likely to be true, it's also not impossible.
Franklin didn't invent the postal service, and Postmaster General is titular gloss, at best.
Just as those who vote control elections, those who deliver the mail control information.
And none of this changes the fact that there's no good reason for the government to be directly involved in the system in any way other than to tax and regulate it as for other businesses, except that it gives the government temporary, secluded possession of the materials being delivered. And the only reasons for wanting to have that capability are to inspect the content of the mail, or to covertly transport mail you don't want anyone else to track.
Re:Junk Mail (Score:2)
First way to tell if its junk mail: does it say 'resident' (or whatever your language happens to be) in the addressee? Yes? Its junk.
No? Maybe junk, maybe not.
If you just throw out the ones with the wrong addressee name for the address or ones that say 'current resident' or variations on that then you've already cut down on 99.9% of the problem with junk mail.
Re:Junk Mail (Score:2)
Actually, the real problem with junk mail (in the US at least) is that it's the largest source of revenue for the USPS (over 50% of volume!) So it's actually in their interest to keep allowing the horribly wasteful and inefficient practice.
Re:Junk Mail (Score:2)
In the US "junk mail" PAYS FOR THE POST OFFICE DAMMIT. It pays. It pays. It damn well fucking pays. It is one of the few reasons rural post offices can remain open.
Couple that with the BTU's that marketers send and it is a double economic whammy!
In one months time I get enough 'junk mail' that is safely burnable to lower my heating bill about $30. Eh carbon schmarben.
Some of it is perfect for the masking needed for electrolytic etching of brass and the masking needed for other metals.
What is not safely burnable can be in some way recycled or has other uses. There's a process that can turn newsprint to micarta like laminate which is durable and other than the paper is non-toxic. It's final toxicity is dependent on the paper.
I know it's a hideous thought but you can get more junk mail.
V-Mail (victory mail) (Score:3, Informative)
Old idea, new implementation.
PDFs instead of film negatives.
Re:V-Mail (victory mail) (Score:2)
Yea, except the general public can actually do something with PDFs, where as film negatives are really a pain in the ass to deal with for this purpose.
True, old idea, new implementation, but its definitely an improvement over the last one.
Re:V-Mail (victory mail) (Score:2)
Yea, except the general public can actually do something with PDFs, where as film negatives are really a pain in the ass to deal with for this purpose.
Especially if you want them to be really private.
Re:V-Mail (victory mail) (Score:2)
There was no privacy in V-Mail, of course. It was wartime, and you were writing to troops in the field (or they were writing to you). Every V-Mail was read and censored before being microfilmed; everybody was very aware this was the case.
Re:V-Mail (victory mail) (Score:2)
Not so bad when you're set up to process it in bulk. The recipient never got the microfilm negative, of course; he got a print of the image produced by the V-Mail facility. The size was still reduced by 60%, though.
V-mail delivered on paper not film (Score:2)
Yea, except the general public can actually do something with PDFs, where as film negatives are really a pain in the ass to deal with for this purpose. True, old idea, new implementation, but its definitely an improvement over the last one.
The public never saw v-mail films. Film was just the transocean transport media. V-mail was printed on lightweight paper once it got to the U.S. The letter was also folded up to be its own envelope. Or at least thats how the single sheet v-mail based letters my grandmother received were. IIRC it looked like the original letter was written on a special v-mail form not on general purpose paper. Perhaps that made for automated processing. Other letters my grandmother received that were on regular paper and/or were multiple pages were shipped as the original paper rather than v-mail. Or course that might be an army/navy thing. The letters on regular paper were from the navy, the v-mail was from the army.
--
Perpenso Calc [perpenso.com] for iPhone and iPod touch, scientific and bill/tip calculator, fractions, complex numbers, RPN
no junk mail? (Score:1)
Re: no junk mail? (Score:2)
Depends on how many assholes like me you have to deal with.
I have a stack of printed 'return to sender' labels laying next to my door. When I get junk mail I put it back in my mailbox with the RTS label on it.
While thats a little nutty I admit, its better than my original plan which was to shove it down the post mans throat before lighting it on fire. At least I don't got to jail this way, and I'm pretty sure it eats into any profit they might have.
Re: no junk mail? (Score:2)
Lots and lots and lots of money.
The one service in the U.S. that will do this mail culling for you charges $19.95 per month for it. And then on top of that, if you actually want something scanned, they charge per-piece fees. And the best one is, if you want them to dispose of the paper copies in a recycling bin it's free, but if you want them to shred the paper copies it's an extra $4.95/month...so if you're doing this to make your bills all-electronic, you have to pay 25% extra or your bills (and the account numbers and other personally identifying info they contain) become the property of the local recycling center...
So there's plenty of room for the US Postal Service to find a way to profit from charging you not to ever deliver you a piece of junk mail or a bill again.
Filtering.. (Score:4, Informative)
You are a lucky man. Here it is the business model (Score:2)
You're a lucky man, Here in the UK it's part of the national post service's business model to accept money from spammers to deliver junk mail. So we get loads of junk mail whether we like it or not. The postal workers recently went on strike because they didn't want to deliver junk mail to people but they got told by the employers they have to, and so have had to back down and accept they must deliver it if they want to keep their jobs.
Re:You are a lucky man. Here it is the business mo (Score:2)
Hey, I believe Itella has a form which you can fill at the post office to ban this kind of junk too.
UK junk mail and why the unions objected (Score:2)
You guys are so lucky. Actually I think you have a generally cool country and I think I'd happily try living in Finland if I wasn't so rubbish at languages! - thoroughly enjoyed my visits to Helsinki.
So this junk mail problem. Until recently the post workers had to deliver "unaddressed mail" to houses - junk mail/spam which is addressed "Dear Householder/ To The Owner" etc. Usually this is from insurance companies, double glazing companies etc, people selling us stuff. They don't even know who lives in the house.
Currently, the cap on the number of these items is three per house per day [guardian.co.uk]. But with the ratification of the new agreement between the Communications Workers Union (CWU) and the Royal Mail, that cap will be lifted. The postal workers represented by their unions weren't happy about this, they don't like carry the extra weight on their backs every day and know that they aren't popular with house owners for delivering junk mail. If they didn't have to carry so much junk mail they could carry more real mail and get round more houses in the same time.
So already you can get 18 junk mails a week (no Sunday deliveries) but now we might get as many as the junk companies want to post us.
We do have a junk mail opt-out system you can sign up for "Mail Preference Service" but this only stops you from receiving *addressed* mail, stuff with your name on it (so if you joined a competition for a prize and gave them your name and address and they send you junk afterwards). It doesn't stop the *unaddressed* mail.
I think Finland sounds a more civilised country than the UK in this respect.
The problem is our country is short of money so the national services like the post are looking to find ways of making money and being paid to deliver junk mail is something they will do...
Re:Filtering.. (Score:2)
Couldn't do that in the US. A carrier could be fired or even criminally prosecuted if he deliberately failed to deliver a piece of mail legally posted to you. It's called "interfering with the mail" and it's a Federal felony.
No Spamming Consumers In Any Way (Score:2)
We have the same law(s) in all of Scandinavia (as well as non-Scandinavian Finland).
It extends to e-mail as well, you are not allowed to spam consumers by phone, SMS, email or mail unless you already have a direct relationship with them (i.e. they're already customers).
My government provides a website where you can register your reservation against any form of commercial solicitation. It does however not include charities. All businesses have to update their registers every three months to filter out any new reservations, and it's *their* responsibility to do so. If they break the law there are severe penalties available to the relevant authorities.
Just Facts - Scandinavia does not include Finland (Score:2)
The Americans/Australians/South Africans are no more British than you are Scandinavian just because you were a colony.
Scandinavia consists of the three Kingdoms of Denmark, Norway and Sweden.
I know you Finns like to think you are Scandinavians, but we Scandinavians don't think of you as such - and that's the only opinion that matters.
German, British or general European ignorance of who is what does not make you any more Scandinavian. You're Nordic, get over it.
I tend to think you have more in common with your Russian neighbors than us, not the Finns in present day Russian territory, but the real Russians. Or perhaps more like our Sami friends in some ways.
Either way you're not ethnically, linguistically or historically (see: Vikings/Kalmar union) related to us Scandinavians. You're still very nice people, but you're not part of our family. Just our extended "family" of Nordic friends.
Re:Filtering.. (Score:2)
That’s the wrong way around! I have “Kein Einwurf, ausser:” (“No (mail) droping, except:”) on my mailbox. With a list of exceptions below. Which is: Only normal letters, addressed to me personally. Packets have to be handed over to me personally, since they don’t fit in. Everything else (giving them to neighbors) counts as “not delivered”, and assistance of theft by the mail man.
I hope to completely remove the mailbox in the future, and put a sign there, saying: Packets: Are to be delivered to me in person (signature-proven). Everything else: Only digitally! (Digitally signed, if needed.)
Re:Filtering.. (Score:2)
But now after the ParkCom trial you could change your sign to read "Mainoksista laskutetaan 50 euroa kappaleelta. Toimittamalla mainoksen hyväksyt sopimuksen." (Adds will be charged 50 euros/add. By delivering the add you have accepted this aggreement.) and start making money by receiving adds \o/
Just found out, huh? (Score:1)
Bad Comparison (Score:2)
You're missing the point, this is meant to replace postal delivery to all consumers and corporate customers.
That's very different from your "outsourcing" scenario which I doubt very many buy into. This would be the standard service for all, not some extra service you buy.
Packages? (Score:1)
Don't know about Finland, but I mostly use the mail system for packages and magazines. Wouldn't be very happy if service on those items was cut back to a couple of times per week.
Re:Packages? (Score:2)
Re:Packages? (Score:2)
Really, because you get packages and magazines every day of the week? You must be fast, I don't think I could read 20 or so magazines every single month. You really can't wait up to ... 4 days ... to get something that comes ones a month? Would you have a embolism if the publish just shifted the mailing date back by 4 days?
And you're sending important things you need to get right away via standard mail rather than FedEx or its equivalent? Really?
$20 says if no one told you, you'd not notice for months.
Re:Packages? (Score:2)
Don't know about Finland, but I mostly use the mail system for packages and magazines.
There's parody on this [www.hs.fi] in Finland's main paper today. "The organically grown lamb you ordered arrived as an attachment."
Already in production in Portugal (Score:1)
This kind of service is already implemented by the national post office in Portugal for a long time.
It's called ViaCTT [viactt.pt].
Half-Truth, An Optional Service (Score:2)
That's very innovative of Portugal, but the Finns want to use it by default. That's very different from just offering it as an optional service. The Finns want everyone to use it.
It's actually very logical that the postal services of the world would want to stop wasting time and money on delivering mere documents. It's the box/parcel/package delivery that is profitable and important today.
How does it cut emissions? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:How does it cut emissions? (Score:1)
Fewer deliveries, fewer vehicle miles.
Re:How does it cut emissions? (Score:2)
If the mail is scanned at the receiving mail sorting facility, it will reduce aggregate tonnage of mail transferred to and from central sorting facilities by a lot. It won't reduce trips by much, but it should reduce fuel usage per trip, and thus reduce emission poundage. The next logical step, once the practice is dominant and hardcopy flow becomes a trickle, will be to aggregate mail from slow days, thus reducing trips, too.
And it makes sense. I only check my mailbox once a week, sometimes twice a month. Maybe a little more frequently if I'm chain-watching the Netflix. No reason the postie should be there every day, either.
Re:How does it cut emissions? (Score:2)
Did you miss that the mailman would only have to go to all those remote locations twice a week instead of 6 times?
Privacy? The market will set the price (Score:2)
Dial 1-800-COURIER (Score:2)
"Welcome to DHL, how may I help you today?"
"Hello, I'm a lawyer, I need these documents delivered to my client in person."
On a related note this is Europe, we're mostly socialists here, the "free market" is not that interesting to us. We're more interested in social services, and the postal service is not a profitable operation in most countries. It's a basic service required and paid for by the government. Reducing the cost, without reducing the service level is more important.
Why is this necessary? (Score:3, Interesting)
We pay all our bills on line - barely any incoming bills, no outgoing checks - I have written maybe 3 checks in the last 5 years. e-mail has replaced most of our correspondence. The only thing that shows up in my mailbox is adverts and the magazines I subscribe to, and very occasionally stuff like property tax assessments and 1099s etc.
How about the postal service let me opt out of getting junk mail delivered? I keep the garbage bin by the mailbox for a reason - only about 5% of what shows up in my mailbox actually survives the walk up the driveway to the house...
Re:Simple Answer: Funding (Score:2)
Re:Why is this necessary? (Score:2)
What is a check, or a cheque? Living in Finland, I think I saw one in actual use last time in very early nineties - almost twenty years ago.
Same for me, I guess I signed last cheque in 1989, since then it has been cash, debit and credit cards or electronic banking. Buyers of our apartment paid with cheque in 1999, but they were a bit strange in other ways too.
All the actual mail I get and care about is bills - that I could, with one call, convert to fully "electronic" PDF-only service.
And those are not ones I need to get as dead-tree print imitation. Many regular payments are based on direct payments: I get a notification email week or two in advance and I do not need to do anything to get them paid (except to make sure that there is enough money on account). If there is something wrong with those (so far none), and I want to challenge it I can remove it.
For me that experiment would not work, because about alI physical mail I receive are on physical for a reason.
What Bullshit is this? If I want to send a PDF (Score:2)
....I'll scan it myself and send a PDF. Volunteer only tends to turn into the way it's done very quickly if costs can be cut at all. Glad I'm not Finnish. Tell your postmaster to stop smoking weed.
You can do this in the USA and other places... (Score:2)
Some full-service private mailbox facilities will do this for you to - they scan all the snail mail that arrives for you and then email the scans to you. Convenient for maintaining a mailing address if you are on the road a lot or are otherwise far away from your mailing address.
You're Not Getting The Point (Score:2)
You're missing the point, the Finns want to use it by default for everyone. That is a whole lot more innovative than offering it as an optional service.
It would reduce the frequency of physical postal delivery, saving on delivery costs while maintaining service levels.
We all know how to scan and email documents, the Postal services of the world aren't blind. Lots of countries offer this as a service, it just doesn't reduce the cost structure of the Postal service.
Re:You're Not Getting The Point (Score:2)
You're missing the point, the Finns want to use it by default for everyone.
Lol, thanks for repeating the article summary for me. I don't know how I ever read it and didn't read it at the same time. If we all just stuck to the exact contents of the article summary there would be no posts here.
I'm pretty sure you can't name a private mailbox facility that does scan and email without seriously googling for it. The point of my post being that most people are unaware that they can get the personal benefits of that service themselves without involving a government agency. Oh look - government abuse of privacy was actually mentioned in the article, I guess that was part of the original point after all.
Not for my .... (Score:2)
A few months ago in a Postal office (Score:2)
"Heeeey!!! I just figured out how we can get PAID to read Playboys all day!"
Viewable on phone? (Score:2)
Wow, I think phones here work differently than those in Finland.
This service is available in the US, too... (Score:2)
.. from a company called Earth Class Mail. They receive your mail, send you an image of the envelope, and let you tell them what to do with it: shred it, recycle it, open and scan contents and send PDF, deposit check, etc. The company was the subject of a sort-of documentary last year.
Kramer had it right (Score:2)
There was a Seinfeld episode where Kramer went into the post office to stop sending him mail - got me thinking. Why do we have to receive all this crap in a box in our front yard? I pay my bills online or schedule checks from my bank each month. There are few items that I actually open up every month, most go straight into the trash. The items I do open I end up scanning into PDF anyway as invoices or paystubs.
I actually pay for a service like this: Earth Class Mail [earthclassmail.com], there are few others like this too. They receive your mail and scan the envelope which you access online just like your e-mail, then you can pick it up (inconvenient) or scanned, forwarded or shredded/recycled. It's a bit expensive and I've only been doing it for a couple months but so far so good.
I have a real street address (no PO Box) which so far no one has balked at: the DMV, my insurance company, voter registration.
Of course, the reason I am doing this is so that I can live anywhere I want without having to change my address every time I move -- except for magazine subscription (which with the new iPad/eReader devices will hopefully not be needed anymore). I work remote and can take my phone number anywhere I go (skype, vonage, etc) and make or receive calls from my laptop.
Re:Not real, it was April's Fool joke! (Score:2)