frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

France's homegrown open source online office suite

https://github.com/suitenumerique
367•nar001•3h ago•181 comments

British drivers over 70 to face eye tests every three years

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c205nxy0p31o
99•bookofjoe•1h ago•81 comments

Start all of your commands with a comma (2009)

https://rhodesmill.org/brandon/2009/commands-with-comma/
414•theblazehen•2d ago•152 comments

Hoot: Scheme on WebAssembly

https://www.spritely.institute/hoot/
77•AlexeyBrin•4h ago•15 comments

Leisure Suit Larry's Al Lowe on model trains, funny deaths and Disney

https://spillhistorie.no/2026/02/06/interview-with-sierra-veteran-al-lowe/
11•thelok•1h ago•0 comments

OpenCiv3: Open-source, cross-platform reimagining of Civilization III

https://openciv3.org/
770•klaussilveira•19h ago•240 comments

First Proof

https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.05192
33•samasblack•1h ago•19 comments

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback

https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.12501
49•onurkanbkrc•4h ago•3 comments

Stories from 25 Years of Software Development

https://susam.net/twenty-five-years-of-computing.html
25•vinhnx•2h ago•3 comments

The Waymo World Model

https://waymo.com/blog/2026/02/the-waymo-world-model-a-new-frontier-for-autonomous-driving-simula...
1020•xnx•1d ago•580 comments

Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

https://blog.alaindichiappari.dev/p/software-engineering-is-back
156•alainrk•4h ago•192 comments

Vocal Guide – belt sing without killing yourself

https://jesperordrup.github.io/vocal-guide/
159•jesperordrup•9h ago•58 comments

72M Points of Interest

https://tech.marksblogg.com/overture-places-pois.html
9•marklit•5d ago•0 comments

A Fresh Look at IBM 3270 Information Display System

https://www.rs-online.com/designspark/a-fresh-look-at-ibm-3270-information-display-system
16•rbanffy•4d ago•0 comments

Unseen Footage of Atari Battlezone Arcade Cabinet Production

https://arcadeblogger.com/2026/02/02/unseen-footage-of-atari-battlezone-cabinet-production/
102•videotopia•4d ago•26 comments

Software Factories and the Agentic Moment

https://factory.strongdm.ai/
10•mellosouls•2h ago•9 comments

StrongDM's AI team build serious software without even looking at the code

https://simonwillison.net/2026/Feb/7/software-factory/
8•simonw•1h ago•3 comments

Making geo joins faster with H3 indexes

https://floedb.ai/blog/how-we-made-geo-joins-400-faster-with-h3-indexes
152•matheusalmeida•2d ago•41 comments

Show HN: Look Ma, No Linux: Shell, App Installer, Vi, Cc on ESP32-S3 / BreezyBox

https://github.com/valdanylchuk/breezydemo
261•isitcontent•19h ago•33 comments

Monty: A minimal, secure Python interpreter written in Rust for use by AI

https://github.com/pydantic/monty
273•dmpetrov•19h ago•145 comments

Ga68, a GNU Algol 68 Compiler

https://fosdem.org/2026/schedule/event/PEXRTN-ga68-intro/
34•matt_d•4d ago•9 comments

Show HN: Kappal – CLI to Run Docker Compose YML on Kubernetes for Local Dev

https://github.com/sandys/kappal
15•sandGorgon•2d ago•3 comments

Hackers (1995) Animated Experience

https://hackers-1995.vercel.app/
545•todsacerdoti•1d ago•262 comments

Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Technical Info

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/
416•ostacke•1d ago•108 comments

Show HN: I spent 4 years building a UI design tool with only the features I use

https://vecti.com
361•vecti•21h ago•161 comments

What Is Ruliology?

https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2026/01/what-is-ruliology/
61•helloplanets•4d ago•64 comments

Show HN: If you lose your memory, how to regain access to your computer?

https://eljojo.github.io/rememory/
332•eljojo•22h ago•206 comments

An Update on Heroku

https://www.heroku.com/blog/an-update-on-heroku/
456•lstoll•1d ago•298 comments

Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS

https://github.com/microsoft/litebox
370•aktau•1d ago•194 comments

Female Asian Elephant Calf Born at the Smithsonian National Zoo

https://www.si.edu/newsdesk/releases/female-asian-elephant-calf-born-smithsonians-national-zoo-an...
61•gmays•14h ago•23 comments
Open in hackernews

E-COM: The $40M USPS project to send email on paper

https://buttondown.com/blog/the-e-com-story
120•rfarley04•8mo ago

Comments

calvinmorrison•8mo ago
now the junk mail subsidizes USPS. I wonder if they could be profitable without all the credit card preapprovals in the mail.
j_w•8mo ago
USPS doesn't technically need to be profitable. It's a service guaranteed by the Government. Government services do not need to turn a profit.

Yes, currently the service is expected to fund itself. This is short sighted and has progressively made one of the greatest public services worse.

giancarlostoro•8mo ago
Sure, but then when something goes severely wrong, you wind up thinking of things to better fund USPS. I think USPS doesn't need to be aggressively profitable, but it should at least aim towards being as self-sufficient as reasonably possible. I don't see an issue with this.
Goronmon•8mo ago
Sure, but then when something goes severely wrong, you wind up thinking of things to better fund USPS.

This logic could be applied to literally anything, so your argument is effectively that the government should never fund anything.

If there is a war, cancer/disease research is going to be less important, so the government shouldn't fund cancer/disease research.

If suddenly a famine strikes, war is going to be less important, so the government shouldn't fund the military.

If a sudden deadly disease arises, funding for food security/research is going to be less important, so the government shouldn't be funding any of that as well.

robertlagrant•8mo ago
You're straw-manning their argument to be much more all or nothing than it is. Definitely if there's a total war economy, there's going to be less money for other things, even if that thing is "keeping future inflation in the single digits".
potato3732842•8mo ago
Exactly. Nobody expects the welfare office to be self sufficient, what are they gonna do, charge all the recipients?

But a mail and parcel service, something that the private sector does profitably, shouldn't be deeply in the red though a little from time to time is probably fine.

fragmede•8mo ago
On the other hand though, if the private parcel service had to fund 40 years of pensions instead of giving out 401k's, and were obligated to serve unprofitable routes, they'd be deeply in the red. It's not a remotely level playing field, so it's no wonder the government parcel service is having problems.
potato3732842•8mo ago
I wouldn't consider the USPS to be deeply in the red when compared with other government operations.
fragmede•8mo ago
deeply in the red is your phrase, not mine
robertlagrant•8mo ago
> It's not a remotely level playing field

What's causing the unlevel playing field?

fragmede•8mo ago
Various acts of Congress that force them to take on a huge amount of debt and force them to run unprofitable routes. A private company has no such requirements.
robertlagrant•8mo ago
Oh yes, true, the Post Office in the UK has the same burden. I more meant the pensions.
HWR_14•8mo ago
It costs 15x as much to use a private sector mail service as the USPS.
robertlagrant•8mo ago
I can imagine it would cost a bit more, because corporation tax, and you probably can't afford to run a year where you lose $8.8bn[0].

Although I thought USPS had an enforced monopoly on US mail, so how did you do the comparison with private sector mail?

[0] https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2019/1114-...

HWR_14•8mo ago
I looked up the cost to FedEx an envelope to somewhere in the US. Looks like $10 is about standard (unless you want to go too far or too rural). The USPS will send an envelope anywhere for $0.74. 10/0.74 = 13.5x

The USPS has a monopoly on traditional delivery to a mailbox. So FedEx walks all the way to the door which makes it not "traditional delivery"

giancarlostoro•8mo ago
> The USPS has a monopoly on traditional delivery to a mailbox. So FedEx walks all the way to the door which makes it not "traditional delivery"

Sometimes I find Amazon packages in my mailbox, though I know sometimes amazon will use USPS, so could just be them.

fkyoureadthedoc•8mo ago
The downstream benefits of a well functioning USPS could be worth running it at a loss. If efforts to make it profitable make the service worse, then it could be a net negative.
jgeada•8mo ago
And the perverse incentive of this direction of thinking is that when you elect people with this thought pattern they prove the point by sabotaging the service. Then they say "see, government is ineffective ", and either directly pocket the resulting money (corruption) or give it to their rich friends (oligarchy).
fzzzy•8mo ago
You obviously haven't lived in rural america.
dfxm12•8mo ago
On a side note related to your comment, just one side benefit of urbanization would be more efficient delivery of services (including delivery services).

Thankfully, the government guarantees it will deliver letters to some remote rural places at a price private companies can't touch, but we can do better to make life easier for everyone: the mail man, the people wanting their mail, etc.

fzzzy•8mo ago
I agree that urbanization makes delivery much more efficient. My point was that if USPS goes away, there are many areas of rural america that simply won't be served because it is too expensive.
orwin•8mo ago
Could USPS offer limited check accounts and debit cards?

I've been twice now in WV, in counties so far away from everything, the only government presence is USPS. The only proof you're in the modern US is USPS (and a bit further a weird, small public library near a weirder Dollar tree).

Some people have trouble getting their retirement money, other are destitute who found a new, non-homeless life (but have trouble with debt collection or just lost their papers), And from what I've understood, USPS has buildings and employees present everywhere and is really trusted in those deep parts, more than anything the government does.

Wouldn't offering basic banking (and maybe limited but free internet access) be a nice addition to help the poorest in the US?

Just an idle thought I had for a while

moduspol•8mo ago
I'm from WV. I always figured Wal-Mart would pick it up eventually, but I think there may be laws that make that difficult.
justin66•8mo ago
I imagine the question is how much money there would be in it for Wal-Mart.
jdeibele•8mo ago
A lot of stores in the US used to take payments for utility companies. The idea was that as long as you were there paying that, you'd be tempted to buy things from the store.

Paying by check in the mail put a huge dent in this and then having the utility automatically debit your account pretty much put an end to it from what I've seen. I'm sure there are some areas where it still is a thing but they'd also have a high number of people without bank accounts.

For a while, utilities would only debit checking accounts, presumably because ACH payments are so much cheaper than credit card ones. A few years, they opened up to credit card payments. There seem to be a lot of people who do everything on credit cards and they must have had to change with the times.

justin66•8mo ago
It used to be standard for merchant banks to prevent almost anyone from charging more for credit cards transactions, as part of their contract terms, even though the merchant pays a percentage for every credit card transaction. That is what changed (I believe there were lawsuits and ultimately legislation).
jermaustin1•8mo ago
Walmart has partnered with a few "financial services" companies to offer bank accounts in the past, but the partnerships never seem to last, except Green Dot.

I usually actually have a handful of checking accounts for splitting up bills, not relying on a single bank, etc. And a couple years ago I started a Chime account for my "allowance" because they were partnered with Walmart, and you could deposit cash at Walmart, well not anymore (at least not at my Walmart). I can go to walgreens, but I never need to go to walgreens, so that card has been removed from my wallet.

bee_rider•8mo ago
This sounds like a “postal banking system,” some countries have done it. The US had it at one point.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings...

> The United States Postal Savings System was a postal savings system signed into law by President William Howard Taft and operated by the United States Post Office Department, predecessor of the United States Postal Service, from January 1, 1911, until July 1, 1967.

Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren have suggested bringing it back.

amoshebb•8mo ago
Yes, I’ve also thought postal banking could help drive down the visa/mastercard tax on nearly all small businesses must pay now. The government has run an expensive payment network (the mint) since before 1776, no real reason they should stop now that it’s cheaper to do.
nxobject•8mo ago
I'd argue that its passport services are a success – at this point, delivering random services at POs would have few downsides.
Qworg•8mo ago
Postal banking existed in the US in some form until 1967. We could (and should) bring it back just for the reasons you stated.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings...

There are places in the US where the bank drives to the town once or twice a week, since there's otherwise no way to get cash or transact.

insane_dreamer•8mo ago
Many countries have something similar. In some countries it's where most people do their banking.
potato3732842•8mo ago
>Yes, currently the service is expected to fund itself. This is short sighted

I could not disagree more.

While I agree they don't "need" to be profitable and we "could" just give them tax money the fact that they try to be in the face of competition and come pretty close to doing so despite some dumb requirements really results in an incentive structure that puts them head and shoulders above pretty much any other subsection of government one interacts with. So perhaps let's not remove the incentive for profitability.

Edit: And before anyone tries to construe this as me advocating for privatization or anything else like that, I'm saying they're fine the way they are (on a macro level, I'm sure there's tons of individual items that could use refinement, like any organization) and ought to be a model for other government functions.

>and has progressively made one of the greatest public services worse.

What? Are you joking? Have you ever tried to do anything other than a bog standard transaction at the DMV or get anything beyond typical "homeowner pays professional to do typical thing" type work permitted? The USPS is one of the most user friendly services in existence even once you get off the beaten path of sending standardized envelopes and parcels. If you restrict the comparison to just federal services it's not even close except perhaps some very specific common workflows but even then when it goes off the rails it goes off the rails way harder and is way more painful to resolve. Ask anyone of social security age if you don't believe me.

kochb•8mo ago
Either it is able to fully fund itself through sender fees and other operations, or the net losses are ultimately paid for by other government revenues, primarily taxes.

I enjoy Christmas cards and personal letters as much as anyone, but with electronic payments and telecommunications taking more of the volume, it is increasingly becoming an advertising service. If it is operating unprofitably, we are paying a form of subscription fee to receive those ads.

nxobject•8mo ago
More charitably, it's a cost-sharing scheme for last-mile delivery to rural communities and deep suburban sprawl – as, to be fair, is often true for other rural services with significant federal funding like healthcare and higher education.
dfxm12•8mo ago
At some point, we should do what we can to promote urbanization. Being able to deliver government services more efficiently is one benefit.
jermaustin1•8mo ago
A lot of the people who don't want to live in urban/suburban areas also view "government services" as a bad thing to begin with. Probably because they've never had good access to services.
dfxm12•8mo ago
I think they view government services as a bad thing for a few reasons, despite having access to good government services. These two stick out to me:

The ubiquitous conservative media bombards them with lies about the quality, quantity and cost of these services, along with who receives the benefits.

They also haven't taken a step back to consider all the things they enjoy that are provided as government services, like roads, police, education, subsidized mail delivery, unemployment, support for dairy products, etc.

pessimizer•8mo ago
Alternatively, they view government services as a bad thing when they are terrible, which they very often are because of the retreat from public investment that's been going on since the 80s; and when they view them as good, they also view them as temporary. Because they will be.

No efficient service will be allowed to survive long in the US, if anyone has any power to cut it. An efficient service is just one that temporarily lacks enough middlemen to increase costs, or enough red tape to reduce enrollment. If neither of these things happen, that means no one with any power has any personal interest in it, so it will be cut arbitrarily at some point in order to make a budget target.

The reason USPS has lasted so long (even in its degraded state) is just because it has lasted so long previously, and is deeply integrated into society. But there's been a bipartisan effort to privatize it and sell it off (to each other) for nearly a generation now. They've taken the steps of lowering its quality and level of service, barred it from entering lines of business that private companies have taken over, and played accounting games with it in order that people will depend on it less. This is not something "conservatives" did, but both Democratic and Republican Congresspeople have even dropped into deceit to try to make happen, and they publicly blame each other for the inexorable progress of dismantling USPS during each administration to distract extreme partisans.

Democrats talked a lot of trash about DeJoy before not firing him when they had the opportunity. It's like how they screamed about DeVos being horrible and out of touch, but Arne Duncan, the school privatizer-in-chief, got to play the "cool" white guy who plays basketball with the "cool" president with virtually identical policy positions.

Once people have stopped depending on the USPS because it is bad, they can give it the Royal Mail treatment that they've always wanted. Mail privatization in the UK was a massive success if you don't care about the mail. The people who got it made a lot of money. The mails there became so brutally expensive and unreliable that it probably affects exports and it still doesn't matter.

edit: sometimes I feel optimistic, though. There was a recent announcement that while hiring for a new person to run public transportation in Chicago, the city has decided that, this time, they will look for somebody with experience in transportation. This is unusual because the job is usually filled by political patronage, by someone with no experience.

nxobject•8mo ago
Don't we all believe that! I think the challenge to do it politically without ending up getting entangled into culture warring over urbanisation (e.g. "15 minute city" conspiracy theories [1]). The best we can do is endless suburbia...

[1] https://www.npr.org/2023/10/08/1203950823/15-minute-cities-c...

jermaustin1•8mo ago
As a business that ships physical products through USPS because they have been WAY more reliable than UPS or FedEx, I wouldn't mind paying more for the service (well passing it on to customers), so long as it improved the service. But the non-government run parcel services can't compete (in my experience) with the USPS, even with the recent rate hikes that have been going on every few months.

Right now I have about a 1% lost/damaged package rate (averaged over 12 months - it's a tiny amount and it is insured), but come Christmas, that shoots up to around a 10% lost/damaged package rate through USPS - some of those packages do eventually resurface, and I let the customers keep them (I've already filed the insurance claim and shipped a replacement).

UPS was at 5% on average - never used them around Christmas - so no data for that - they might be better than USPS and the were close enough in cost just further away from my workshop.

FedEx (only used for 2 weeks) cost double and 30% of my packages were lost or damaged - can't average it out since there isn't enough data, but having to file claims for 1 in 3 packages after already paying 2x USPS rates wasn't going to fly.

BenjiWiebe•8mo ago
It always surprises me how different people's experiences very so widely between UPS, FedEx, and USPS.

We ship packages via UPS, and have <1% lost/damaged. Not sure how long it's been now since a damaged/lost package - maybe 300?

It probably helps that our smallest packages are ~1000 cu inch and 6 pounds. Hard to lose.

I don't like dealing with UPS customer service, but I really like the actual shipping service. And it's very fast and predictable. Very rare that it takes any longer than UPS WorldShip predicts. 1 day shipping to most of our customers in our state, and some in neighboring states.

jermaustin1•8mo ago
From my memory (I didn't record lost and damaged separately, just "claims") it was mostly damages (I think same with all of the carriers), but I have no idea how solid oak/walnut/cherry trays that are 3/4" thick wrapped in bubblewrap and in a bubble mailer gets damaged by anything other than someone stomping on it.

ETA: Except Christmas, that is basically 100% loss, though, about 50% of those losses seem to show up after the claims have been submitted.

BenjiWiebe•8mo ago
We ship perishables (cheese) in styrofoam coolers. When we have a damage claim, what usually happens is that the cooler is broken or even smashed completely, and the cheese got too warm and separated.

And then UPS won't pay out a claim, since they don't cover perishables, even when it's their fault for smashing the cooler. So we started self-insuring at $3 per order, plus we've learned how to package the cheese in the cooler better so it's less likely to break.

And as I mentioned it's very rare now to get a damaged one.

int_19h•8mo ago
I tried to follow the link in your profile to find your store but it seems to ultimately go nowhere. Could you post it?
BenjiWiebe•8mo ago
It's my family's business, not my own, hence the link not taking you anywhere. It's www.jasonwiebedairy.com.
TheJoeMan•8mo ago
This creates a market discontinuity by the government that leads to abuse. Part of the reason for Amazon's dominance is that USPS undercharges for package delivery. When Amazon rolled out their own delivery service, they optimize delivering the "cheap" packages, and making USPS deliver the "expensive" out of the way packages, and due to flat-rates, USPS was in the red. USPS's solution? Keep squeezing grandma who wants to mail a few first-class letters a year.
BenjiWiebe•8mo ago
Maybe in some places, but in our rural area (Durham, Kansas) 95%+ of Amazon packages are delivered by UPS.
kbolino•8mo ago
It actually was profitable for most of its existence. It zealously guarded its monopoly on first-class mail because that's where the money came from. And it did so before it was spun out as a quasi-private entity.

This is actually one of the challenges of public services in the US today; many things, from mail delivery to bus and train service to road construction and vehicle registration, were once self-sufficient but haven't been for a long time. There's a lot of reasons for this, but one of the outcomes is that entities which used to take care of themselves now have to beg for a growing portion out of the general fund.

However, it's clear that the 1970s experiment to have it turn a profit again didn't work and likely never would have worked (it was, in many ways, set up for failure).

jermaustin1•8mo ago
For the USPS, it would be profitable if it wasn't required to self-fund and pre-fund all retirement benefits for current and future employees 75 years in advance, paying for retirement health care for "workers" who aren't in the workforce, or even born yet.

It was a political ploy to force the USPS into debt in 2006 with the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. No other federal agency or private sector business pre-funds its retirement benefits.

kbolino•8mo ago
That requirement was repealed in 2022. The USPS still isn't profitable. While it reaped the benefit of that repeal and reported only a small loss in 2022, it reported much larger losses in 2023 and 2024, comparable to its loss in 2021 (when the requirement was still in effect).
strongpigeon•8mo ago
Last quarter was slightly profitable [0], but yeah the losses in 2023 were pretty big.

https://about.usps.com/what/financials/financial-conditions-...

jermaustin1•8mo ago
If I'm not mistaken, they still carry the debt they acquired to pre-fund, and still spend about $10B on retirement benefits each year.

But to me, none of that really matters, because I don't believe a government entity should be turning a profit on me, because then it is a tax. So I want the USPS running at a loss (pulling from appropriations as needed), but as close to breakeven as possible. If it ever pulls a profit, I expect prices to drop in accordance.

kbolino•8mo ago
If you see it as a tax, and the tax funds the service, and you like the service, why wouldn't you want to pay it?

About half of their liabilities were forgiven as part of the 2022 legislation. They still have debt and retirement liabilities, but those are more in line with other large services (private or public) now. However, they've each increased over 20% per year since 2022, which is quite a lot.

Personally, I would like to see a return of postal banking, in which case the postal service would pay out its profit to its accountholders.

----

FY23 report showing the halving of liabilities from '21-'22 (p. 29): https://about.usps.com/what/financials/annual-reports/fy2023...

FY24 report showing the significant increase in other liabilities from '22-'24 (p. 28): https://about.usps.com/what/financials/annual-reports/fy2024...

kotaKat•8mo ago
To be fair, all the credit card preapprovals in the mail help ensure every last American is reached by mail, even if it means by mule train.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/06/mule-ma...

https://www.removepaywall.com/search?url=https://www.theatla...

citizenfishy•8mo ago
I developed so many similar services for the UK Royal Mail in the 1990's

We used Yellow Royal Mail branded envelopes to gain attention.

maguay•8mo ago
Would love to hear more about your experience! Any chance you'd be up for an interview on the Buttondown blog?
citizenfishy•8mo ago
Happy to, find me on LinkedIN - Dave Barter CEO Nautoguide
dmix•8mo ago
> The Postal Rate Commission took 15 months to review E-COM—long enough that standard postage went up 5¢ in the interim. It barred the USPS from operating its own electronic networks, just in case the Post Office decided to deliver messages electronically and in print. And it raised the price on the service to 26¢ for the first page, plus 5¢ for a second page.

> Sending the messages wouldn’t be simple, either. Customers had to register their company with the USPS using Form 5320, pay a $50 annual fee, send a minimum of 200 messages per post office, and “prepay postage for transmitted messages received, processed, and printed for each transmission,” dictated the 1981 Federal Register.

Almost sounds like a parody

NoMoreNicksLeft•8mo ago
So that people can discuss the US Postal service intelligently. About 15 years ago, there was a service (Outbox) designed to scan your mail, email anything important to you, and discard junk mail. They were growing, people enjoyed the service, and then they went to Washington DC to talk to the Postmaster General about expanding nationwide.

https://www.rstreet.org/commentary/outbox-vs-usps-how-the-po...

>When Evan and Will got called in to meet with the postmaster general, they were joined by the USPS’ general counsel and chief of digital strategy. But instead, Evan recounts that Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe “looked at us” and said “we have a misunderstanding. ‘You disrupt my service and we will never work with you.'” Further, “You mentioned making the service better for our customers; but the American citizens aren’t our customers—about 400 junk mailers are our customers. Your service hurts our ability to serve those customers.'”

That's the US mail. Can we all please stop pretending that any actual human needs the US mail to continue? No one's paying their bills through the mail... you can't even really write checks. Hell, given how international mail works, it's the US government subsidizing Aliexpress and Temu. No one should be defending the US Postal Service.

chneu•8mo ago
The USPS does a lot more than ship junk mail. It's a fun joke but it's super ignorant. It speaks to idiots, everyone else rolls their eyes and thinks you're not very bright.

It's a public service. It doesn't need to turn a profit because every dollar put into it generates economic activity.

NoMoreNicksLeft•8mo ago
>The USPS does a lot more than ship junk mail. It's a fun joke but

Junk mail is well over 99% of their activity by any metric you can offer. Pieces of mail, revenue, weight, etc. It's not a joke. It's the fucking truth of it. And you're all bizarrely delusional if you can't or won't see it.

>everyone else rolls their eyes and thinks you're not very bright.

I've experienced that all my life. And yet I always out-tested everyone who thought that. Why would that change? The comment above yours talks about how he's always paying by check... what the fuck is grandpa going to do in the next couple years when that goes away? They can only postpone the deprecation of paper bank checks for so long. Guess he will either have to stop living in the 1950s, or just croak.

>It's a public service.

It's a goddamned public nuisance.

>It doesn't need to turn a profit because every dollar put into it generates economic activity.

???

We could also pay them to dig holes and fill them back in. That'd be an economic win too, eh? Though your comment probably comes closest to hinting at the real justification: a unionized voting bloc that without it the Democrats would become doomed to irrelevance.

tomhow•8mo ago
> It's the fucking truth of it. And you're all bizarrely delusional if you can't or won't see it.

Please avoid personal swipes like this in HN comments, and the general style of commenting on display here. It's against the guidelines:

Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

chneu•8mo ago
I have no clue what your comment is even trying to say. You just sound offended instead of making any really valid points besides the rate of junk mail.

Notice I didn't say the USPS doesn't ship junk mail. Just that they do a lot more than just ship junk mail. This is objectively true.

The USPS provides massive benefits to numerous americans. Prescription drugs shipped via USPS, last mile service to people that other carriers wont deliver to, signature mail, passports, etc.

Money put into the USPS benefits the economy. This is like food stamps. A dollar in creates more than a dollar of economic activity. This is something that some people absolutely refuse to acknowledge. The USPS doesn't need to be profitable because it provides an invaluable public service.

hard lol and eye roll at "it's a goddamned public nuisance." what a telling thing to say, because it invalidates your entire stance. The bias is on full display. It's almost like you read my comment then wrote a satire piece to show how correct my comment was. It really sounds like you've bought the conservative mentality that everything the government touches is bad. Haha.

ProllyInfamous•8mo ago
>No one's paying their bills through the mail... you can't even really write checks.

This is exactly how I pay all my non-cash invoices — via USPS, sending checks. I don't even use email anymore (freedom!).

Ironically, I lost access to online banking a few years ago [which I'd really love to have, but US banking has ridiculous "security" infrastructure].

jdietrich•8mo ago
This kind of service does have at least one very valuable niche application - armed forces personnel on active deployment. During the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, British troops received hundreds of thousands of letters every month through the e-bluey service. Letters could be sent via email (including attachments) and were printed as close as possible to the recipient. It greatly reduced logistics costs and improved speed of delivery, often facilitating next-day delivery to extremely remote Forward Operating Bases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Forces_Post_Office#The...

It isn't an entirely novel idea - during the Second World War, mail was often sent to very remote destinations on microfilm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-mail

Gud•8mo ago
Why didn’t the service personnel have access to their e-mail?

I was in Afghanistan for a different country. It was my job to keep the satellite communications working, including so people could send emails to their friends and family.

jdietrich•8mo ago
>Why didn’t the service personnel have access to their e-mail?

Because they weren't in one of the larger bases that had satellite internet. Combat troops in the wilds of Helmand might go weeks without seeing a fresh egg or a slice of bread. Satellite terminals circa 2002 were bulky, expensive bits of kit that just weren't that widely distributed, at least in the British armed forces.

Gud•8mo ago
Fair enough.

I was there in 2010 and even our FOBs had access to BGANs.

dheera•8mo ago
It would presumably be more secure to have the recipient receive them directly with a cell phone or satellite device. Printing them creates a literal paper trail and footsteps.
jdietrich•8mo ago
In the context of peer or near-peer conflicts, Ukraine has shown us many reasons why a cellphone or satphone can get you killed. Anything with a radio transmitter is a giant beacon announcing your location if your enemy has a half-competent ELINT operation. Allowing personal devices with internet access to be used in the field is a gargantuan COMINT risk, because it's basically inevitable that some idiot is going to post a geotagged photo of something sensitive on social media. Mail delivered through specific authorised channels can be monitored and censored much more easily than real-time communications.
koolba•8mo ago
Why do you even need two way communication? Just have an encrypted signal with per device decryption keys. Kind of like how satellite tv works but for messages. You won’t have proof of delivery or a way to reply, but that’s a feature, not a bug.
bigfatkitten•8mo ago
That also exists.
int_19h•8mo ago
FWIW smartphones are nearly universally used in Ukraine by both sides because too much useful stuff runs on them. Artillery calculators, for example.

Russians also use theirs for actual comms a fair bit because their equipment (like older tanks from storage) often lacks encrypted digital radios, or sometimes any working radios at all. Ukrainians invested heavily into DMR after the Donbas war in 2014-15 where they had similar troubles.

deepsun•8mo ago
Besides mandatory censorship, I've heard in WW2 they just delayed all mail by 2 weeks intentionally. By that time all secret information is not relevant anyway.
lldb•8mo ago
Another interesting thing about WW2 mail - they would photograph letters onto microfilm, then reprint them on the other end to save valuable shipping capacity.
mizzao•8mo ago
What did a printer look like in WW2?
aspenmayer•8mo ago
You didn’t really need a printer per se.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanhope_(optical_bijou)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microform

> Portable readers are plastic devices that fold for carrying; when open they project an image from microfiche on to a reflective screen. For example, with M. de Saint Rat, Atherton Seidell developed a simple, inexpensive ($2.00 in 1950), monocular microfilm viewing device, known as the "Seidell viewer", that was sold during the 1940s and 1950s.

Apparently that’s not what they really used for mail in WW2, though. This video shows how it was really done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BpixrjNhGE

reaperducer•8mo ago
Before long distance phone service was widespread, but local service was becoming common, people often sent a telegram over the phone.

Person in City A would phone the local telegraph office and dictate a message. It would be sent over the telegraph wires to the nearest telegraph office to the recipient in City B, where it would be written down by the operator. Then someone would phone the recipient and read the telegram over the phone to them.

This was in use at least into the late 1940's that I know of.

BiteCode_dev•8mo ago
French postal service offers this, which is very convenient for legal letters because it stores a copy of it so people can't pretend they received something else.
Sadzeih•8mo ago
I use this constantly when I have an online document I need to send through the mail. I just use the online postal service to send it directly. It's probably a lot environmentally friendly since they can just print as close as possible to the destination. Instead of sending it across the country etc...
floam•8mo ago
There is something like this being used in jails and prisons now. The purpose is to limit the ability of people to sneak in paper bathed in fentanyl or other potent enough substances.

Inmates do not receive originals - incoming mail is scanned at some service provider’s office that a PO Box forwards to, and things are reprinted at the detention center and walked to the inmate. Or people sign up for a faster service where photos / letters are uploaded through an app to skip the snail mail + scanning step.

One of these is called pigeon.ly

At most participating facilities the only exception to get an inmate physical paper from the outside world is legal mail.

ProllyInfamous•8mo ago
>At most participating facilities the only exception to get an inmate physical paper from the outside world is legal mail.

This is how some imprisoned authors have managed to publish their samizdat — by sending thoughts/outlines to their lawyer [under the pretense of legal mail] — when their written ramblings might otherwise have been destroyed [as contraband].

robobro•8mo ago
> The purpose is to limit the ability of people to sneak in paper bathed in fentanyl

Or is it to make even more profit on the backs of prisoners & their families for companies who win juicy contracts from the government? This was being done by private companies before fentanyl.

Look into Jpay - they do a lot of slimy things and make a lot of money doing so. The free market in action I guess.

https://theappeal.org/prison-tablets-ipads-jpay-securus-gtl/

floam•8mo ago
With the switch to this paradigm at a certain detention center, the time to get an inmate mail simply addressed to them with an envelope effectively tripled, up from what was already like a week, and if you included any irregular shaped paper or cute stuff it’d get mangled in the process. Ask me how I know.

It’s certainly an exploitative service taking advantage of a captive audience. I do think the substances thing is making many more smaller jails consider it.

tantalor•8mo ago
We use this for summer camp. The kids aren't allowed anywhere near computers or phones, let alone internet access. So we write them emails and attach photos that are printed out and delivered to their bunks.

The service is https://www.bunk1.com/

hoseyor•8mo ago
Why not simply sit down and write an actual letter with a pen on paper, encouraging your child to also write?
ceejayoz•8mo ago
Some camps are a week long. You'd only really be able to write on Monday/Tuesday to be sure it got there by Friday.
tantalor•8mo ago
The campers are definitely encouraged, and sometimes required, to write letters by hand. In fact their handwriting is much often better than adults, because they write by hand much more frequently.
vaindil•8mo ago
I'll start by saying I am not a parent.

I attended summer camps as a kid and worked at one for years as an older teenager. I love summer camps. Looking back, part of the magic for me was being away from my parents for an extended time in a way that wasn't really possible in any other setting. The service you linked (a way for parents to constantly follow along with what's going on at camp) just feels... wrong? unnecessary? detrimental? to me. Do parents really need to be updated all the time with what's going on while their children are away for a week or two?

I don't think it's immoral or unethical to offer this service, I'm sure there's a market for it, but I just don't see why anyone would choose to use it. Let the kids go off to camp and have a good time, and they can tell you about it when they get home. It would really take the wind out of my sails if I got home and my parents already knew everything I had done, instead of getting to tell them all about it myself.

exabrial•8mo ago
jfc all we want is the opposite. Think of the massive emissions reduction if we reduced all physical spam to emails.

1. diesel needed to cut the trees down

2. diesel needed haul logs to saw mills

3. natural/gas/coal needed to make the water to turn logs into paper

4. diesel needed to haul paper to printer to make spam

5. diesel needed to haul spam to post office

6. diesel needed to haul spam to to your door

7. diesel needed to put spam in the landfill

miki123211•8mo ago
The Polish Post actually introduced a system like this recently.

It serves as boring technical infrastructure for government agencies which still need to send physical mail. Instead of each agency employing their own people to handle printing their mail and stuffing it in envelopes, they can just send it electronically to the post office, which will handle it far more efficiently.

The eventual goal is to move most people to e-deliveries, which you're encouraged to set up when using government services online. For those who haven't done so, the letter will be printed as close to them as possible to save on delivery time and costs, regardless of where in the country the sending agency is located.

Ancapistani•8mo ago
This reminds me of the time FedEx spent $200m trying to integrate fax into their delivery network: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapmail
jdeibele•8mo ago
What I wanted (and still want) is a secure place to hold statements from banks for savings accounts, credit cards, etc. and brokerages.

I bank with two credit unions. Years ago, they implemented a fee of $2/month for paper statements. I get it, printing and mailing statements costs money. But it also comes to me without me having to log into an account and navigate my way to where the statement is.

I'd prefer to have them send the statement each month to an email address I specify. I get that they should take security seriously, so practically maybe that only means Gmail, Apple Mail, etc. are whitelisted.

I used to think there was a business idea here, that the banks should be willing to pay $.10/statement to save on the cost of paper. I'd be willing to use the service because the statements would automatically go to it and be retained for forever.

The reality is, I'm afraid, that the banks don't want you looking at statements because then you might find errors and dispute them and that costs the banks money.

ivan888•8mo ago
Yeah I’ve had this same idea for the same reasons, and came to the same conclusions that without legislation, no incentive exists to send statements as attachments in emails or to store them with a 3rd party where they can’t be tampered with when a mistake is discovered
franga2000•8mo ago
> I get that they should take security seriously, so practically maybe that only means Gmail, Apple Mail, etc. are

What does that have to do with security? Geniune question. I really don't see what attach vector this prevents

jdeibele•8mo ago
If I were a bank, I would want to send statements containing financial data only to secure places. So that means something like Google, where they have a serious security team protecting accounts and not something like Ed's ISP and Bait Shop.

The threat would be from people cracking Ed's and getting the statements there, possibly without the sysadmins at Ed's ever knowing that it had happened.

insane_dreamer•8mo ago
I have mixed feelings about the USPS.

On the one hand, it seems like a good public service -- and certainly essential when it was created and up until recently.

But 99% of what comes in my mail box goes straight in the trash. We do everything we can to stop email spam, why not stop postal spam?

If the government offered email as a public service, perhaps there wouldn't need to be any reason for postal mail in terms of ensuring a means of communication that reaches every one.

The Postal Service could still exist but would be quite expensive and only used for things that actually matter (i.e., original legal documents like car title, etc.)

anotheruser13•8mo ago
This reminds me of the old FedEx Zapmail service they had in the 80s. They didn't get much traction and the service was shut down after 2 years at great expense.