Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rethinking The Postal System

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 50 posts

Re: Rethinking The Postal System

#11

Post by wildgift »

I think there's already a system where you pre-pay postage online, print a barcoded label, and then drop it off. The label contains routing information.

There's no anonymity. Rather, there's redundancy because they print the destination address. If you need to hide you address, you can buy a PO Box at the post office or a private box seller.

I wish they'd innovate by having the post office retail windows open on Sundays, rather than these current cutbacks. (The cutbacks are due to overfunding their pensions, and that a 2006 law is forcing that.)

Re: Rethinking The Postal System

#12

Post by wildgift »

rdl wrote: post #9

IMO it would be pretty easy to change the USPS to be profitable or sustainable, but politically difficult. Preserving universal service (expensive rural routes and facilities) should be done via direct government subsidy, vs. commercial cross subsidization. Reducing or contractorizing staff (to cut medical and retirement costs) would have been done already by a really private company, but would have political and eco…

The first thing they need to do is reduce the pension funding requirement, which was forced by a 2006 law. They have to fully fund the pension for 75 years, and do that in 10 years. That would reduce their operating budget deficit.

Second, they need to push their parcel service, and open the counter all week long. The internet has caused a reduction in regular first class postal mail, but is also increasing the number of packages people send. Rising fuel costs make sending packages locally a good option.

I like Saturday home delivery, but from a business perspective, it's not critical. Parcels, however, I think are critical.

Re: Rethinking The Postal System

#13

Post by egypturnash »

frasierman wrote: post #5
dmschulman wrote: post #2

The post office already offers a lot of the services you described: "You could specify the to and return adress, you could pay with a credit card, and you could add whatever options you want." What would the point of obfuscating your address with a 16 digit ID number be? You'd be adding another layer of complexity to an already simple system of names and addresses on a designed letter carrier's route. If you want obs…

I totally see where you're coming from, but since the system is mostly automated (as far as I can tell), it'd be just as easy for them to grab from a DB than to try and parse out an adress and postage. I didn't really start mailing things until the last 3-4 years, so I must admit that I don't know how the system worked previously. While I agree that it wouldn't be immediately adopted, I don't think it would require t…

Have you ever gotten things in the mail? Even junk mail?

If so, you may have noticed that your mail is ultimately delivered by a human. Someone who has to be able to grab a handful of mail out of their bag and perform a quick visual check that yes, everything in this bundle actually goes to this address. Someone who might have a hundred bundles destined for an apartment building, and would like to be able to quickly parse the addresses to put them into the proper mailbox instead of having to type a long, cryptic ID into a smartphone, and hope they continue to have connectivity.

Any proposed new addressing system also needs to deal with the fact that the postal service serves EVERYONE. Even people way out in the middle of nowhere who have no cellular service. The ONLY processing power available to those mail carriers is their own brain, so it pretty much HAS to be human-readable.

All of the things you complain about in the address are USEFUL redundancy. Including all of that stuff makes it more likely that mail will get to its destination in the event of the ink being smeared (or running due to being rained on). It's more data that's useful in error correction.

Also, if you are mailing out many things and hate copying the info manually, let me introduce you to a concept called "printable address labels" and "mail merge". I recently had to mail out about a hundred books after a successful Kickstarter; I manually addressed maybe three of them. I put books in mailing envelopes, put the labels on the envelopes, sealed them shut, and brought them to the post office. They figured out how much it would cost me to mail them. I paid with a credit card. It really wasn't a major hassle at all.

Re: Rethinking The Postal System

#15

Post by rdouble »

You can already do most of this. The bigger issue with the post office is even if you do everything right (delivery confirmation , insurance) they still lose your packages and have customer service a bit south of what's depicted in the movie Brazil. The perception of the USPS as incompetent and surly is not unwarranted.

Re: Rethinking The Postal System

#16

Post by wildgift »

dmschulman wrote: post #10
frasierman wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally see where you're coming from, but since the system is mostly automated (as far as I can tell), it'd be just as easy for them to grab from a DB than to try and parse out an adress and postage. I didn't really start mailing things until the last 3-4 years, so I must admit that I don't know how the system worked previously. While I agree that it wouldn't be immediately adopted, I don't think it would require t…

Realistically too, the post office is running on a shoestring budget. I don't quite understand their biggest overhead costs (beyond paying out salaries and pension benefits to postal employees) but there has to be a way to make the mail system work the way it's worked but at less cost to tax payers.

Until this 2006 law that requires the pension to be fully funded for 75 years, and that this be achieved in three more years, the USPS was self sufficient. Postage paid for everything. No cost to the taxpayer. I remember when this was achieved in the 80s - it was on TV. This link has a lot of detail about the USPS.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/consumerawareness/a/uspsabout....

Re: Rethinking The Postal System

#17

Post by tallanvor »

jivatmanx wrote: post #14

Why do they need giant, expensive buildings in the center of every town, rather than partnering with convenience stores like in Europe?

I don't know if that would be impossible, but based on the federal laws around the USPS and who is allowed to handle mail, it would be very difficult.

Re: Rethinking The Postal System

#18

Post by wildgift »

egypturnash wrote: post #13
frasierman wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally see where you're coming from, but since the system is mostly automated (as far as I can tell), it'd be just as easy for them to grab from a DB than to try and parse out an adress and postage. I didn't really start mailing things until the last 3-4 years, so I must admit that I don't know how the system worked previously. While I agree that it wouldn't be immediately adopted, I don't think it would require t…

Have you ever gotten things in the mail? Even junk mail? If so, you may have noticed that your mail is ultimately delivered by a human. Someone who has to be able to grab a handful of mail out of their bag and perform a quick visual check that yes, everything in this bundle actually goes to this address. Someone who might have a hundred bundles destined for an apartment building, and would like to be able to quickly…

This is true. Presently, I don't know my mail carrier, because I moved, but where I grew up, we knew them. If someone mis-addressed a letter, the carrier would deliver it to the right person. They could deliver using the family's name, rather than the address. Back when people hand-addressed personal letters, errors were common.

back in the day, back in the day...

Re: Rethinking The Postal System

#19

Post by ericclemmons »

You can get a bar code that pretty much handles the automation when you order postage online.

What the author is missing is that somebody has to physically deliver the package or letter, and that's why you need the destination printed on the package.

Doing that with IDs alone is needlessly complex.

Re: Rethinking The Postal System

#20

Post by wildgift »

jivatmanx wrote: post #14

Why do they need giant, expensive buildings in the center of every town, rather than partnering with convenience stores like in Europe?

They already do this. There are postal counters that are contracted out. I went to one in LA's Koreatown. It was croweded but OK, and was a little faster than the perpetually understaffed USPS windows in Pico Union. (It's often 5+ people in line, and one clerk.)

They took their large sorting facility property, Terminal Annex, and leased it to a server colocation company. It's at 900 Alameda, Los Angeles. Look it up.

They stil have PO Boxes and a counter there. I recently tried to drop off a letter there on the weekend, but THERE WAS NO FREAKING MAILBOX. USPS needs to stop eliminating mailboxes. There are even post offices without mailboxes outside. Do they not want to make money?

Post reply on HN