Hacker News Reader

I’ve always seen this as a primary function of the postal service. The government should defend and maintain it as the essential medium of communication that it is. It’s not as fast as most forms of modern communication, but it handles a lot of essential tasks efficiently.

On a somewhat related note, never underestimate the bandwidth of a sneakernet.

View on HN

Absolutely, and this is my go-to argument any time someone says that the USPS is obsolete/unprofitable/archaic/redundant/etc.

The point of the USPS is that the government can always correspond with any of its citizens, with an organizational service guarantee.

But even postal longhaul trucking is private contracted, even if it's not to one giant entity.

Same for rural route carriers.

They can’t stop the service though. At most they can delay it while the government changes contractors.

Isn't this basically true for all the cases listed above?

It's semantics at some point. But I don't know where.

Ie, even if USPS operated the routes, they're relying on trucks built by private companies.

No, it’s not the same because the users can still get the same service eventually. Trump will never be able to access his Twitter followers again.

Government contracts don't change the requirements of the Government to deliver the mandated services.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com