[問題] 台南為什麼一定要蓋新市政中心?消失
我知道因為目前的雙市政中心有公文傳遞效率不彰的問題
但我好奇的是 現在都已經2014年了 網路如此發達
這種公文往返的問題不就一套雲端系統就能解決了? @@
一定要靠通車跑來跑去?
建構一套雲端系統整合兩市政中心資訊
以後這種行政流程的效率搞不好比一個新市政中心還快
花費的金錢和時間應該都遠低於蓋一座新市政中心
也不會有舊市政中心棄置問題
搞不好這套系統以後還能整合到各區層級較低的單位
達到區區都是市政中心
還是我想得太簡單了@@?
求解
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 114.27.64.127
※ 文章網址: http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Tainan/M.1413249643.A.EA0.html
→
10/14 09:22, , 1F
10/14 09:22, 1F
→
10/14 09:22, , 2F
10/14 09:22, 2F
→
10/14 09:23, , 3F
10/14 09:23, 3F
→
10/14 09:23, , 4F
10/14 09:23, 4F
所以為什麼不乾脆一起數位化
客戶端只需要有 軟體+電腦+網路 就能辦到
這只不過是把公文印出來的步驟變成網路傳送而已啊
減少紙張 增進效率 甚至安全性還能提高
※ 編輯: n91324 (114.27.64.127), 10/14/2014 09:30:01
推
10/14 09:30, , 5F
10/14 09:30, 5F
我就是不太懂 網路一個按鍵就可以傳送到市中心的東西
為什麼非要 印出來 通車跑到市中心遞送
※ 編輯: n91324 (114.27.64.127), 10/14/2014 09:33:06
→
10/14 09:31, , 6F
10/14 09:31, 6F
→
10/14 09:41, , 7F
10/14 09:41, 7F
推
10/14 09:42, , 8F
10/14 09:42, 8F
→
10/14 09:43, , 9F
10/14 09:43, 9F
→
10/14 09:44, , 10F
10/14 09:44, 10F
→
10/14 09:44, , 11F
10/14 09:44, 11F
→
10/14 09:46, , 12F
10/14 09:46, 12F
→
10/14 09:46, , 13F
10/14 09:46, 13F
→
10/14 10:02, , 14F
10/14 10:02, 14F
→
10/14 10:04, , 15F
10/14 10:04, 15F
→
10/14 10:06, , 16F
10/14 10:06, 16F
推
10/14 10:11, , 17F
10/14 10:11, 17F
推
10/14 10:14, , 18F
10/14 10:14, 18F
→
10/14 10:19, , 19F
10/14 10:19, 19F
推
10/14 10:21, , 20F
10/14 10:21, 20F
推
10/14 10:56, , 21F
10/14 10:56, 21F
→
10/14 10:57, , 22F
10/14 10:57, 22F
推
10/14 11:11, , 23F
10/14 11:11, 23F
→
10/14 11:11, , 24F
10/14 11:11, 24F
→
10/14 11:11, , 25F
10/14 11:11, 25F
→
10/14 11:13, , 26F
10/14 11:13, 26F
推
10/14 11:19, , 27F
10/14 11:19, 27F
推
10/14 11:42, , 28F
10/14 11:42, 28F
→
10/14 12:12, , 29F
10/14 12:12, 29F
→
10/14 12:32, , 30F
10/14 12:32, 30F
推
10/14 12:53, , 31F
10/14 12:53, 31F
推
10/14 13:53, , 32F
10/14 13:53, 32F
推
10/14 13:54, , 33F
10/14 13:54, 33F
→
10/14 13:54, , 34F
10/14 13:54, 34F
→
10/14 13:58, , 35F
10/14 13:58, 35F
推
10/14 14:49, , 36F
10/14 14:49, 36F
→
10/14 15:12, , 37F
10/14 15:12, 37F
→
10/14 15:13, , 38F
10/14 15:13, 38F
→
10/14 15:14, , 39F
10/14 15:14, 39F
推
10/14 16:55, , 40F
10/14 16:55, 40F
噓
10/14 17:30, , 41F
10/14 17:30, 41F
→
10/14 17:30, , 42F
10/14 17:30, 42F
→
10/14 17:34, , 43F
10/14 17:34, 43F
→
10/14 17:34, , 44F
10/14 17:34, 44F
→
10/14 17:34, , 45F
10/14 17:34, 45F
推
10/14 20:26, , 46F
10/14 20:26, 46F
推
10/14 21:14, , 47F
10/14 21:14, 47F
→
10/14 21:14, , 48F
10/14 21:14, 48F
→
10/14 21:24, , 49F
10/14 21:24, 49F
→
10/14 21:25, , 50F
10/14 21:25, 50F
→
10/14 21:25, , 51F
10/14 21:25, 51F
→
10/14 22:49, , 52F
10/14 22:49, 52F
推
10/15 02:45, , 53F
10/15 02:45, 53F
→
10/15 10:35, , 54F
10/15 10:35, 54F
→
10/15 10:35, , 55F
10/15 10:35, 55F
→
10/15 10:35, , 56F
10/15 10:35, 56F
→
10/15 10:35, , 57F
10/15 10:35, 57F
→
10/15 10:38, , 58F
10/15 10:38, 58F
噓
10/15 16:05, , 59F
10/15 16:05, 59F
→
10/15 17:04, , 60F
10/15 17:04, 60F
→
10/15 17:04, , 61F
10/15 17:04, 61F
→
10/15 17:06, , 62F
10/15 17:06, 62F
→
10/15 17:06, , 63F
10/15 17:06, 63F
→
10/15 17:18, , 64F
10/15 17:18, 64F
→
10/15 17:18, , 65F
10/15 17:18, 65F
→
10/17 00:24, , 66F
10/17 00:24, 66F
→
10/17 00:24, , 67F
10/17 00:24, 67F
→
10/17 20:33, , 68F
10/17 20:33, 68F
→
10/17 20:38, , 69F
10/17 20:38, 69F
→
10/17 20:38, , 70F
10/17 20:38, 70F
→
10/17 20:38, , 71F
10/17 20:38, 71F
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文 (最舊先):
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 4 篇):