Technological experiences current youths won't make anymore

[crazy canuck]

In my experience only the third world (the US and Africa) used fax machines after 2000.

Hell a colleague even came across a US government form that had to be filled out with a typewriter. Who the fuck has had a typewriter since the 80s? Luckily we worked at an old company and he could find one in the basement.

US = laughing stock.

I suppose if you dont care about knowing for certain that the communication was recieved you would not use a fax.  But in most of the civilized world things like being certain a communication was recieved and having the ability to demonstrate that fact still count for something.

When I send a document in the e-mail, the recipient can write me back that they got it.

Yes they can. But what if they dont?

Just this week a regulatory body failed to communicate its decision to all the parties using email because they didnt use someone's propery email address.  That is just one of many things that can go wrong with email.

With a fax you know immediately if it didnt go through to the intended recipient - but I suppose this is one of those technological things that is lost on younger people.

[HVC]

There's a confirmation of receipt option on emails. But i agree, in many cases faxes are better.

[crazy canuck]

There's a confirmation of receipt option on emails. But i agree, in many cases faxes are better.

Again yes if the person actually uses it.  They can choose not to.  So if you dont get the confirmation you dont know if a) they just have not looked at it yet for whatever reason; b) they have choosen not to confirm reciept for whatever reason; c) the email has not yet arrived for whatever reason.

For some types of communication - ie the important kind - that sort of uncertainty is generally not acceptable.

[HVC]

Even then you might fax the wrong number. Courriers are the nly sure way

[Warspite]

With a fax you know immediately if it didnt go through to the intended recipient - but I suppose this is one of those technological things that is lost on younger people.

If you send a fax, you have to follow up with the phone call, because there are plenty of things that can stop a fax from getting to its intended recipient. In the times I've used faxes, I've had everything from the wrong person in the office picking up the paper, to a confidential message ending up in the communal machine, to one of those new-fangled machines with memory storing the message even though it had no toner to print, so even with the delivery confirmation, nothing had actually been printed. A lot of modern fax numbers in fact are not fax machines per se, but rather a fax-receiving capability of a network which then get sent to the recipient's e-mail address anyway; I was using this kind of system over ten years ago in my first job.

I've learnt the hard way, if you want something delivered and proof of it, you pay for a courier.

[crazy canuck]

Even then you might fax the wrong number. Courriers are the nly sure way

If you fax to the wrong number you know as soon as the fax confirmation sheet is printed.

[crazy canuck]

If you send a fax, you have to follow up with the phone call, because there are plenty of things that can stop a fax from getting to its intended recipient.

Couriers are the best option - I agree.

Couriers > fax > email/electronic communication

[Iormlund]

I suppose if you dont care about knowing for certain that the communication was recieved you would not use a fax.  But in most of the civilized world things like being certain a communication was recieved and having the ability to demonstrate that fact still count for something.

I don't know how things work across the Pond but over here in the wild merely sending a fax is no better than sending an email. If you need proof when delivering a document you use a specialized service postal companies provide that has legal value in court.

[garbon]

Yes they can. But what if they dont?

Just this week a regulatory body failed to communicate its decision to all the parties using email because they didnt use someone's propery email address.  That is just one of many things that can go wrong with email.

With a fax you know immediately if it didnt go through to the intended recipient - but I suppose this is one of those technological things that is lost on younger people.

Oh, I generally end up asking them if they got it / calling them if they don't respond.

I had to send faxes at my last position. I hated doing it.

[crazy canuck]

I suppose if you dont care about knowing for certain that the communication was recieved you would not use a fax.  But in most of the civilized world things like being certain a communication was recieved and having the ability to demonstrate that fact still count for something.

I don't know how things work across the Pond but over here in the wild merely sending a fax is no better than sending an email. If you need proof when delivering a document you use a specialized service postal companies provide that has legal value in court.

You dont have fax confirmation reports that are generated automatically by the machine?

[Iormlund]

That doesn't mean anyone relevant has actually picked up the fax. It is of no more value than the automated server confirmation of delivery for an email.

[crazy canuck]

That doesn't mean anyone relevant has actually picked up the fax. It is of no more value than the automated server confirmation of delivery for an email.

Here, if someone gives you a fax number as a means with which you are able to officially communicate with them sending a document to that number by fax is considered delivery.

The onus is on them to pick it up.  If they do not wish to have that onus then they can decide not to offer fax as a method of delivery.

In your jurisdiction you have to prove that the person to whom the document is addressed has to actually have it in their hands?

[The Brain]

  In lawyerland actual communication isn't important. Good thing they don't operate nuclear plants.

[crazy canuck]

In lawyerland actual communication isn't important. Good thing they don't operate nuclear plants.

In nuclearland actual communication is, I assume, not wondering if someone has recieved an email the plant is about to melt down.

[The Brain]

In lawyerland actual communication isn't important. Good thing they don't operate nuclear plants.

In nuclearland actual communication is, I assume, not wondering if someone has recieved an email the plant is about to melt down.

OK, Luddite.