A poignant maxim, ascribed to various sources, is that there is such a thing as a stupid question: it's the one for which you should already know the answer. It's a point that would be well taken when considering the design of any interaction with a customer ... or for that matter, anyone at all.
In the live service channel, it's wholly intolerable for a person to repeatedly ask the same questions - it's a clear sign they aren't paying attention, or aren't very bright. There's some tolerance for repetition when there's a hand-off: a clerk calls over a manager, and the customer must to repeat all the details, knowing that the manager just arrived on the scene and could not possibly be aware of what was said in his absence. Even then, patience wears thin when there's yet another change, and the same customer must repeat himself (again) to a third person, then possibly a fourth.
The voice channel is much the same, though the adoption of caller management systems by some firms, which pass along key information when the call is transferred, has (rightly) created the expectation that all firms who provide telephone service should handle transfers with equal competence.
In the digital channel, however, no quarter is given to the firm whose systems are so poorly designed that a customer must re-enter details that were entered on the previous screen, or any screen in the same interaction, even once. It's a reasonable and realistic expectation that computer systems, unlike human beings, can pass any data that has been provided buy the user instantaneously. Failure to do so is poor design, low competence, or indifference to the customer, all of which undermine trust.
In addition to decreasing tolerance for repetitive questions, technology has also increased the expectation of longevity. If a person logs into a site they previously visited and places a second order, they expect their delivery address and other details to be preserved, even if several months have passed between the previous order and the present one. And because many firms are capable of doing so, those that are not are held in low regard.
This is one area, among many, in which digital channels should not strive to replicate the experience of older channels - it's possible, and expected, to do better.