3 ms·
Why hasn't the U.S.P.S. taken over email by now?
Its been ages since the advent of email. Why hasn't the US government transitioned postal service into the Internet age?
It would make spoofing accounts, e-mail scams, and possibly most spam a federal offense.
Social Networking and other sites would be required to operate more ethically to prevent being cited for misuse.
A "Do Not Mail" registry could possibly more easily established.
It would create a stable/easier means of paying bills.
It would allow mail to be more organized both for Gov services and US residents.
It would make your email more attributable to an address, increasing credibility for vital email messages.
More systems admins would be hired by the USPS.
The government could shift its focus from heavy machinery to server architecture.
Locations could be set up to print out email into official and/or notarized copies, eliminating the need for physical mail delivery (eventually).
We wouldn't have to rely on private services (Like HotMail, Gmail, AOL, Yahoo etc.) monopolizing our mail service and then shutting it down if they decide to end the service, of if they fail.
Federal email can be tied to each user's physical address or mobile device, solving problems of identity. (No less private than the current mail system and still protected by Federal Law).
Other email services would still be able to flourish and fail despite Feds providing email service, so that you can transfer legal pron without being tracked, don't panic, I'm not talking about the USPS being the only e-mail carrier service here.
I can't believe this hasn't happened yet, would like to hear what the HN community thinks about this.
- mikecane 16y agoScroll down for E-COM. The USPS tried to land-grab email back in the 1980s. Thank god they FAILed. http://www.cybertelecom.org/spam/email.htm http://www.cybertelecom.org/spam/email.htm Those were also the days of MCI Mail: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCI_Mail http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCI_Mail
- aristus 16y agoIt's just not their forte. They move paper (and highly profitable paper spam!) around the world using lots of people in a system they control end to end. Email has none of these properties. Maybe 200 people, tops, run Gmail. Spam is a liability, not a profit center. No one controls the Internet. Etc. This is like asking why Amtrak doesn't take over the mobile phone business.
- wmf 16y agoDidn't you post the exact same thing yesterday?
- winternett 16y agoI posted it late last night, only got one response... I figured posting it during working hours would garner more interest. I was right :)
- SHOwnsYou 16y agoToo much policing at no profit in your scenario. If a foreigner wants to send a piece of mail through the USPS, then they are more than welcome to at (atleast) $0.44 each. If we are only using email and spam is a federal offense, then that guy can mail to his hearts content, making the government waste time and resources trying to catch him. In the current situation, if the government wants to hunt him down, they at least have $132 million to fund the chase...
- winternett 16y agoProfit for a government agency? The USPS has never been a profitable operation as far as I can recall, Haha.. What would really happen here is that expenses would be spared, and turnaround time for mail delivery would be reduced greatly by not having to physically ship letters, and possibly even payments. The USPS would make profit through printing and stationary used during point-to-point email, where official documents could be scanned at one post office, and then printed at another on official paper. Local delivery could be done from each post office after email is routed to the correct center and then printed [locally].
- SHOwnsYou 16y agoGod forbid I say profit rather than revenue (though it seems you used them interchangeably as well in paragraph 2). I just don't think you're thinking through this completely. Expenses would be lower after the infrastructure is built, yes. But there would be minuscule revenue also. The new deficit, however, would likely be comparable to the current deficit. The reason private delivery services (UPS, FedEx, etc) haven't put the USPS out of business is because they only deliver where it is profitable. Live too far away from the drivers' regular routes? Too bad, no package for you. USPS's UJP (unique justification proposition) is that they deliver anywhere, no matter the conditions. The implication of this is that there would still be a great need for postmen, but there would be substantially worse economies of scale for the shipment of items. In addition to the worse EoS, there would also not be the revenue from stamps and associated products to offset the costs. There are other possibilities that might be better, but ultimately the problem is the distance between the goals of public institutions like USPS and private, profit seeking institutions like UPS and FedEx.