We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps • Hacker News Board

Re: We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps

#101

Post by jcrawfordor » Thu, Oct 06, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

garrettgrimsley wrote: post #32

jcrawfordor wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is Data Matrix, Mailmark is basically a logical standard on top of Data Matrix ECC200. Data Matrix allows the blocks to be arranged in multiple layouts, square or rectangular.

Yes, it is accurate to say that all Mailmark barcodes are Data Matrix, but not all Data Matrix are Mailmark. In the document I linked they explain the specifics of the logical standard you mention. The US Postal Service also uses a DataMatrix on some of their stamps, but not all. I just looked up an official specification document for the USPS codes, but couldn't find it. I did find this page dedicated to postal barc…

I can't 100% swear to it but I think the postage meter standards in the US are completely owned by the postage meter vendor (Pitney Bowes) and not specified by USPS. These aren't actually "stamps" proper but meter tape. The meter vendor is on the hook to furnish the validation equipment to USPS, so it's all a closed ecosystem to them.

USPS seems to be lax on postage issues... at least some years ago there was some reporting that they very rarely actually scan (and thus mark as used) meter stamps and so you can get away with using them multiple times in practice. I think this is just because of not wanting to spend the money to install the meter validation equipment on sorting machines, since they already have the IMB to use for routing. I suspect they just don't see a lot of actual issues with counterfeiting

Pitney Bowes is much of what I call the "postal industrial complex" - large aspects of USPS technology are completely contracted to Pitney Bowes and a few other companies like Endicia. Pretty much every form of "electronic postage" in the US, including purchased directly from USPS, is managed by Pitney Bowes or Endicia, not USPS (Post Offices used to use an Endicia product for shipping postage, not sure if they still do).

Re: We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps

#102

Post by scrollaway » Thu, Oct 06, 2022, 11:54 PM UTC

blitzar wrote: post #62

scrollaway wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed it assumes the stamps are scanned upon sale. Otherwise, at best, what you obtain is "where was this stamp sold", which is completely non-identifying. But if you think about it for more than ~10 seconds, you remember that stamps are sold in packs of 4-8 at least . They're also often sold in sheets of 50+. All this makes individual scans painful. So you want to play the devil's advocate and make more assumptions…

Then you need to connect the barcode reader of every post office, supermarket and dodgy corner store to the GCHQ mainframe and voila - no more crime.

Instead of issuing every post office, supermarket and dodgy corner store a new barcode reader which can scan the stamps themselves in order to prove the point of the original person complaining of a panopticon?

I think you missed the part where I’m making the argument against this being even sort of practical as a surveillance tool.

Re: We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps

#103

Post by jillesvangurp » Fri, Oct 07, 2022, 3:03 AM UTC

ale42 wrote: post #92

jillesvangurp wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the only relevant thing about any kind of scannable code is reliability. QR Codes are widely used and seem to work fine with just about any smart phone. So, they are good enough. Maybe Data Matrix is slightly easier to scan. But it's not really a problem with QR Codes.

But AFAIK you can't do non-square QR codes. Plus, at small sizes, you lose a lot of space for the alignment marks.

If that matters to you, then yes that's a limitation. However, big qr codes are easier to scan. Making them smaller requires higher resolution scanning devices and more careful aiming of the device. So, it's not necessarily that big of a deal. The alignment marks are scaled along with the qr code. So, they don't use more space for smaller codes. The shape limitation is more of an esthetic thing. I don't think people care that much.

Re: We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps

#104

Post by fy20 » Fri, Oct 07, 2022, 3:00 PM UTC

FridayoLeary wrote: post #84

ryzvonusef wrote: post #78

> Can I take my stamps to the Post Office to swap them out? > No — you can't swap your non-barcoded stamps out at a Post Office. You will need to pick up a 'Swap Out' form and send in your non-barcoded stamps to Royal Mail (free post address on the form). Print one off our web site; contact Customer Experience and we'll post one out to you; pick one up from your local Delivery Offices' Customer Service Point. > Pleas…

It is stupid. Many things that were once trivial to do in a post office now have extra hurdles.

Not stupid, it was very profitable for some of the Conservative Party MPs and their buddies who allowed it to be privatised.

Re: We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps

#105

Post by ZiiS » Fri, Oct 07, 2022, 4:39 PM UTC

Symbiote wrote: post #77

ZiiS wrote: post #44

Seems very quick deprecation? If they urgently need the barcode why support picture stamps without it. If the don't then supporting both for a year will dramatically reduce the amount of swapping they need to do.

The new stamps were introduced in February this year, and the old ones expire at the end of January next year.

That makes much more sense; "We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps" is not a super clear way of saying "We added barcodes to our stamps over 7 months ago". I guess not having bought stamps in that time dose mean I am not really the target market.