The Future of Stamps 131
New submitter Kkloe writes: Wired is running a profile of a gadget called Signet, which is trying to bring postage stamps into the age of high technology. Quoting: "At its core, it is a digital stamp and an app. If you want to send a parcel, you'd simply stamp it with a device that uses a laser to etch it with your name and a unique identifying pattern. After that, the USPS would pick up your package; from there, the app would prompt you to provide the name of the person you're trying to reach." I'm curious whether such a finely-detailed etching can even survive a journey. How far can you expect it to travel before all the handling and sorting make the mark unreadable to the sorting machines in the delivery office? Then you'd have to worry the post office would mark it as a fraudulent stamp (as someone has to pay for the shipping in some way) and either return it or throw it away.
Re: (Score:2)
They could post the stamps (or a merkle tree header of all stamps of the last hour) on the bitcoin blockchain, or any other (cryptographic) notary. Then nothing is "lost in the machine", and you don't have to trust the service's computers.
Re:No postmark date? (Score:5, Insightful)
The main problem with electronic stamp creation currently is the lack of a postmark date stamp from the postal service.
99.9% of the mail I receive is either metered or printed with a bulk permit. Neither of these is postmarked by the postal service.
That means that the item can be lost for any length of time without any accountability, just lost in the machine.
How does a postmark provide accountability? If you want to track the package or certify delivery, that is an extra charge, and an extra sticker.
Anyway, I read TFA, and I still don't understand what "problem" they are trying to solve. Normal stamps seem to work pretty well for me, for the two or three times a year that I mail a letter.
Re: (Score:2)
You're missing the point. This isn't about solving a problem, it's about using technology. It doesn't have to solve a problem so long as technology is involved.
Even better, you get to use a laser!
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't about solving a problem, it's about using technology. It doesn't have to solve a problem so long as technology is involved.
This. I am tired of people using technology just because, even if it is less efficient than doing it the old fashioned way. Texting is a great example of billions of hours wasted on conversations that could have been over and done in seconds otherwise. Metro interface is another example where a UI that is efficient on something with no better alternative input methods is forced on a platform that has much more preferable and efficient input methods.
At least we have to give companies credit for believing i
Re: (Score:2)
I find lasers very problematic. It's not the laser per se that's the problem, it's the bloody great tank of seawater that splashes around all over the place from the shark that the laser is mounted on. Seawater and stuff I want to post isn't a good mixture.
Re: (Score:2)
but it has more accountability than a simple stamping of a date? and what good does that date stamp do while it is in transit for years?
like, how do you know it is even stamped? if there's an unique code in your stamp and that qrcode gets scanned in, then at least it is scanned in and potentially could have information available to you about it's state. something simple stamping would not give. ...but... about this device... why the need for a laser burner when a simple printer does the job? or why no jus
okay (Score:1)
i can't remember the last time i mailed something. maybe once in 2012.
Shipping companies.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Shipping companies already do similar things with bar codes etc. So to the question in the summary, yes it should be fine. To the general idea, why? What's wrong with a QR code or a bar code?
Re: (Score:1)
> Since QR codes are easily known, it would be trivial to send mail using someone else's code and bill them.
Did You see the part where you stamp the package, AND THEN it asks you on your phone for the address to send it to?
It would be no more hackable than a bank account that sends a code to your cell phone before it lets you log in.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
I don't have a phone. What will I do?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
2) Easier to use for one off jobs, where you have one letter. 3) They envision ending/greatly reducing the physical stamp program. This will piss off the collectors a lot.
4) They get paid for it, rather than the company that makes the QR codes etc.
Basically, I don't think it has enough advantages to catch on somewhere where they already have stamps. But ISIL might want it for their new country, I bet they want to replace Syria's and Iraq's old postal system.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The reason for the stamp is because the post office cannot control entry points into the system - i.e., they have "mailboxes" to which users of the system can deposit pre-paid mail. The stamp is the pre-paid part of it.
To do so with FedEx or UPS, you either have equipment to generate the labels for you where you pay for it when you make t
Re: (Score:1)
What's wrong? Nothing, except it's not their design, and they want to make ... *places pinkey finger in corner of mouth* one billion dollars from royalties.
That's why it has to be their design.
Re: (Score:3)
yes, this is a solution in search of a problem.
What future? (Score:2)
Re:What future? (Score:4, Insightful)
There are still bills I pay with paper. (Some companies still charge for the "privilege" of paying online, which pisses me off even though the amount doesn't matter.)
I occasionally deposit checks via mail. Even if I trusted my phone enough to put banking software on it (which would be a silly thing to do), that only works for some kinds of checks.
Some companies respond to customer complaints via paper mail much better than they do via the net.
Sometimes I send checks to family members who aren't technologically sophisticated enough for there to be another way.
Maybe all of those reasons will disappear eventually, but I doubt that will be in my lifetime. It's also worth remembering that you can still send some mail anonymously - frankly, I'm surprised you still can, as there's nothing a totalitarian state hates more than anonymous communication.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to mail cheques to the utility companies and credit card companies and whatnot, but then I discovered that I can pay all of those bills at the bank down the street. They don't charge me anything for taking those payments, either, so it's definitely cheaper than paying for a stamp, an envelope, and a cheque. And it's right down the street so I can walk in, pay cash and get a stamped receipt on the spot.
I'm sure someone is paying them for the service of taking my money and sending it on like that but
Re: (Score:2)
I have some bills which will get "lost" if they are not sent at least certified mail. Sent electronically, it isn't anywhere near as concrete proof [1] as a piece of physical mail sent with a signature trail.
Paper complaints, especially legal work are hard to ignore. E-mail, even calls, there is no paper trail and can be hidden. However, a certified message either gets received or it gets refused. Either way, someone had to interact with the document in a provable way. Even now, our society isn't paper
Re: (Score:2)
I prefer paying my bills by mail...
Re: (Score:2)
There are still bills I pay with paper. (Some companies still charge for the "privilege" of paying online, which pisses me off even though the amount doesn't matter.)
I occasionally deposit checks via mail. Even if I trusted my phone enough to put banking software on it (which would be a silly thing to do), that only works for some kinds of checks.
Some companies respond to customer complaints via paper mail much better than they do via the net.
Sometimes I send checks to family members who aren't technologically sophisticated enough for there to be another way.
Maybe all of those reasons will disappear eventually, but I doubt that will be in my lifetime. It's also worth remembering that you can still send some mail anonymously - frankly, I'm surprised you still can, as there's nothing a totalitarian state hates more than anonymous communication.
For Canadians, cheques by residents are so passé. Businesses, of course, use cheques as proof of payment.
If you are doing consumer banking and If you do not take a special type of bank account, you are entitled to 3 cheques per month, and then whamo, around $7.00ea for the excess. So, we consumers have automated payment from accounts, or even online bill-payment options.
So, keep a balance to cover the cheques, earn no interest, and pay to make payments.
Re: (Score:2)
How is it a good thing that you can only use 3 checks per month for free? Most banks in the US have automated checking and bill payment, and allow you to use as many checks as you like. You usually just have to pay $10 for a pack of 200.
Re: (Score:2)
I've had banks screw that up, is the thing. Wells Fargo, is there no paperwork you can't get wrong?
Re: (Score:3)
This. Actual stamps is mostly a consumer thing, I just checked our commercial postal service and they recommend a "stamping" machine if you send more than 40 letters/week where you charge it up like a prepaid cell phone, same thing for packages except there they normally print to labels they slap on the package. And for the big companies you get bulk pre-printed envelopes with logo that are collected at your place of business and charged to your corporate account, we have those at work. The potential for ab
Re: (Score:3)
I doubt it, at least not anytime in the near future. Stamps do have some interesting and necessary purposes for existence.
I write people in prisons. While some prisons and jails have e-mail systems in place through which you can write an inmate and, in some cases, the inmate can write back (Federal prisons being the best example of this) these are usually funded by a "tax" paid by the inmates in some way. For those inmates who don't want to use such services or cannot (California prisoners being one in t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Barb! Slashdot probably wouldn't have half the flame wars it does if you decided to stop visiting.
I'm honored that I'm the source of half the flame wars (somehow I doubt it - just don't let anyone know I'm the one responsible for slashdot BETA :-).
A quick search for "prison barter" found various sources for the "stamps as currency" myth. In fact, prisoners are only allowed 40 stamps at a time. When an illegal cellphone can go for more than a new iPhone 6, stamps aren't going to cut it. Same with booze, drugs, etc.
Do I know someone who as done time? Of course. Who doesn't?
Re: (Score:2)
A quick search for "prison barter" found various sources for the "stamps as currency" myth. In fact, prisoners are only allowed 40 stamps at a time.
Wow. I mean, seriously, wow. Because they're only allowed 40 stamps at a time, they can't possibly have more than that? You do realize they're not allowed cellphones or drugs at all, and they still wind up getting their hands on those? Logic, it's not just for a tiny part of your comment any more.
Re: (Score:2)
The stamps thing is BS. Inmates keep track of who owes what. They don't have to have any sort of "token" to remind them that "Jimmy the Stool" owes them, and if he doesn't pay up, Jimmy the Stool will be wobblier than a 2-legged stool.
Stamps have a serious problem - they deteriorate with humidity, so good luck hiding them in any of "the usual places."
Much of the time payment is made via contacts on the outside, usually friends or family, or by prison workers. They don't take stamps in return for smuggl
Re: (Score:2)
Do I know someone who as done time? Of course. Who doesn't?
I don't know anyone who has done time. At least not more than a day or two in a city jail.
Re: (Score:2)
Do I know someone who as done time? Of course. Who doesn't?
I don't know anyone who has done time. At least not more than a day or two in a city jail.
So you DO know someone who has done time. And how can you be certain that some of the people you know don't have a hidden past? It's not like most people are going to advertise it. 65 million Americans with criminal records [yubanet.com]
NEW YORK, March 23, 2011 - More than one in four U.S. adults -- roughly 65 million people --have an arrest or conviction that shows up in a routine criminal background check, and a new report from the National Employment Law Project finds that these Americans are facing unprecedented barriers to employment. With the rapidly expanding use of background checks, employers are routinely, and often illegally, excluding all job applicants who have criminal records from consideration, no matter how minor or dated their offenses.
The new report highlights the widespread and illegal use of blanket no-hire policies by providing numerous examples of online job ads posted on Craigslist, including some by major corporations, that effectively bar significant portions of the U.S. population from work opportunities. Because of their blunt impact and extreme overreach, these blanket no-hire policies have become the subject of increasing litigation, attracting heightened scrutiny from the courts and concerned policymakers. At the same time, 92 percent of employers conduct criminal background checks, according to a 2010 Society for Human Resources Management survey.
"The fast-growing use of criminal background checks casts an extraordinarily wide net, potentially ensnaring millions of Americans who have an arrest or other record that shows up in a routine check," said Christine Owens, executive director of the National Employment Law Project. "These background checks are supposed to promote safety in the workplace, but many employers have gone way overboard, refusing to even consider highly qualified applicants just because of an old arrest or conviction. They're not even bothering to ask what the arrest or conviction was for, how far in the past it was, whether it's in any way related to the job, or what the person has done with his or her life since," said Owens.
The NELP report, entitled "65 Million ‘Need Not Apply': The Case for Reforming Criminal Background Checks for Employment," surveys online job ads posted on Craigslist in five major cities—San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, and Atlanta. The survey found numerous examples in which extreme requirements precluded consideration of anyone with a criminal record, in clear violation of federal civil rights law. Major companies, such as Domino's Pizza, the Omni Hotel, and Adecco USA, were just some of the employers that listed entry-level jobs on Craigslist—ranging from warehouse workers to delivery drivers to sales clerks—that unambiguously shut the door on applicants with criminal records:
And with more than a million people in jail at any one time ...
And that doesn't count the 1 in 10 that pass through juvie.
Re: (Score:2)
My claim was that most people know someone who has been in jail. Even if it's being held over the weekend to appear before a judge Monday morning to make bail, they've still been in jail.
And with over a million people in jail, and this population being rotated on a regular basis as people are released on probation or having done their time, and new offenders entering the system, it becomes very hard to say for sure that you don't know anyone who hasn't been in jail. People tend to hide their criminal re
Re: (Score:2)
I hate to have to quote your own post to you, but:
I don't know anyone who has done time. At least not more than a day or two in a city jail.
So you DO know someone who has done time.
I took issue with that claim. Specifically and semantically, as you were misapplying "doing time" as a synecdoche for all jail-based incarceration. Your claim here is invalid.
Too bad your argument won't work with law enforcement the next time you try to cross a border.
Border Agent:: "Have you ever been arrested or convicted of a criminal offence?"
You: "No."
Border Agent: "Well, it says here that you were arrested and held overnight in connection with blah blah blah. Lying to us is a federal offence. Is there anything else you're not telling us?"
Also, falsely arresting someone gives rise to civil recourse, even if it was "only a day or two."
It's binary - either someone
Re: (Score:1)
Outside of a dozen or two holiday cards, maybe three or four pieces a year.
I've yet to see a solution suitable for home users.
Re: (Score:2)
You might use USPS if you don't want third parties to read your messages.
Packages sent through Canada Post (Score:1)
When I send a package from the post office here, they weigh and measure it, determine the price for the postage, and print a sticker with that amount on it. They slap the sticker on the package and that's all there is to it.
I don't remember the last time I sent or received a package that had real stamps plastered on it. Letter mail sometime does, and letter mail that I send out always does since I purchase a roll of stamps once in a while for that purpose. But not packages.
Pitney Bowes (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The ability to keep your mailing address when you move, similar to the way third party webmail services let you keep your e-mail address when you change ISPs, or the way VoIP services let you keep your phone number when you move, or the way DNS lets you keep your URLs the same when you change web hosts.
FTFA:
Re: (Score:2)
How would it know you have a layover in St. Louis?
Re: (Score:2)
Swing and a miss.
Re: (Score:2)
Why "stamp it with a device that uses a laser to etch it with your name and a unique identifying pattern". All it's doing is creating a mailing label, you can do that already.
The idea of auto-forwarding to the address in the post office's database is kind of different; but I'm not sure what that adds to filling out a change of address form and sending it to your post office.
Re: (Score:2)
He also seems to think the USPS should spend billions retooling how they sort mail.
I don't know if they should spend billions, but they should really institute some logic to detect and correct routing loops. Right now these are detected by humans. If there's one ZIP on the address and another zip in the metadata (due to data entry failure, or misaddressing by the sender) then you'll get a routing loop until a human notices. That's pathetic given that every package is scanned when is passes through a sort facility, and they really ought to know where it's going.
Re: (Score:2)
you had me at LASER
I've now seen the future of mail and it's full of sharks, sending junk mail.
Re: (Score:2)
I've wondered about that myself given that the stamps the post office uses today look like some of the Christmas and Easter Seals I remember putting on greeting cards as a kid. As I recall from some discussion I had many years ago, the postage processing machinery actually does not know exactly how much postage is on the envelope. All it really knows is that there is some kind of stamp there and that it has not been canceled. I'm not sure how metered mail is processed but there must be a reason why the p
Re: (Score:3)
Give it another decade - the problem will solve it (Score:1)
I'm not sure why we should invest much time moving "stamps" into the digital age. Does anyone expect the Post Office to even exist, ten years from now?
No one sends physical letters anymore. Almost all of my bills can come electronically, directly to my bank. Doctors offices and medical clinics seem to be one of the few holdouts... and even they seem to be moving online now.
Re: (Score:2)
The article is about parcels.
Re: (Score:3)
The envelope or package that’s been sitting there for days, unsent.
The post office already allowed people to print up their own custom stamps for an extra fee. It bombed.
And there's no way that anyone is going to buy a laser etcher when mailing things is becoming obsolete.
The Canadian government has already told people that mailing payments will cease over the next few years [theguardian.pe.ca].
Additionally, home delivery of the mail is being ended to most of the population. It's already stopped for 1/3 of the population, and the other 3rd
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you don't send physical objects anymore does not mean everyone else does not.
That's a straw man. I send physical objects several times a year. When I do, I use UPS or FedEx because the Postal Service sucks at it. My expectation that the USPS will die does not mean package delivery has to die with it.
USPS's bread and butter has historically always been letters and bills. Nowadays that is rapidly drying up, so their bread and butter has become delivering advertisements to our houses. We don't really need to maintain a government funded agency for advertisement delivery.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I cant FedEx *anything* for a dollar.
Of course not. Thanks to the Private Express Statutes [wikipedia.org], FedEx can't legally deliver ordinary letters unless USPS postage is paid on top of its own delivery rate. The system is deliberately set up such that no one can compete effectively with the USPS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The post office is not being operated in the red because mail is cheap. It has to do with their outdated updated pension rules.
Re: (Score:2)
IDK how it is in the US but here in Poland the post is like an institution. Fe. if you have an invoice or legal paper you can send deliver it yourself, you can send it by private held company like TNT, UPS, whatever but only when you send it via Polish Post (national operator) it gets so called the power of postal stamp. Legally if you choose the right delivery type it is valid as delivery in court. Such postage is still deeply embodied in legal system and I think it has some merit. In Poland f.e. you could
Re: (Score:2)
You can fax legal documents and keep the fax header as proof of service.
A quick search shows that the state of Utah allows alternate service by email or social media [utcourts.gov]. A judge allowed the FTC to serve notice via facebook [sdnyblog.com]. New York allowed email service in 2006, and Australia allows it [cnet.com], and anther New York case of service via facebook was discussed on slashdot last month [slashdot.org].
The old ways are dying. Requiring someone to buy a laser device to burn "stamps" onto envelopes and packages won't work.
Re: (Score:2)
> You can fax legal documents (...) the state of Utah (...) New York allowed (...) Australia allows it [cnet.com], and anther New York [etc.]
But you are you aware that lots of other countries than USA or Austrialia exist and such even tend to have precedent or non-precedent legal systems? I know that general tendency is to go to electronic means where possible but I am quite sure that there still are and still be situations in which the new/current ways are not possible and you need to keep the old syste
Re: (Score:2)
Requiring someone to buy a laser device to burn "stamps" onto envelopes and packages won't work.
This I fully agree. The idea is so stupid I don't even know how it got here to Slashdot.
You must be new here. (checks uid) Nope. Oh well, welcome to our new DICE overlords :-(
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. In the U.S., many federal and state laws assume that the United States Postal Service will be t
Complete waste (Score:5, Insightful)
Why re-invent the printer just to stamp a package? All of the major shipping companies let you print out a shipping label already. As for the other stuff, such as having the shipping company look up an address, that can all be done with software provided there's enough incentive to develop it.
Re: (Score:2)
Anything requiring a printer is a bit broke by design in the modern age.
Re: (Score:2)
Complete waste (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Might as well go total retrotech (Score:2)
Can you etch it in wax?
I can envision a custom mark and a unique postage shipping ID.
Re: (Score:2)
Not only did they solve a problem that already has an answer.. they solved a problem where multi-billion dollar implementation (no matter the actual answer) has been implemented and has proven successful
Stupidest thing I've read in a while. (Score:2)
So I'll need the Laser stamp thingy *and* a smartphone app just to send a letter? Ya, that's much better.
This is a really useless idea (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
here's an idea (Score:2)
bulk mailers use franking machines which have internal counters that the post office uses to bill according to the number of times the machine has been used to issue a letter, and/or prepaid envelopes with printed postage, and for those who don't want or need that kind of expense, physical stamps that they use to apply the proper postage charge prior to dispatch. Also works for occasional posters.
Why fix what ain't broke??
RoyalMail solved problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
... especially since you likely already have a laser printer, and therefore already have the ability to print stamps as needed.
Have you tried to print just ONE label? What a waste of time and labels ...
Besides, just because someone has a smartphone doesn't mean they own a laser printer. With less and less need for hard copies to physically mail stuff, many people have to borrow some luddite's printer nowadays.
Luxury problem (Score:2)
Me, I'm still trying to sell the item in the first place.
Don't we already have this? (Score:1)
99 44/100% fantasy (Score:2)
This is pure advertising for the design house. The concept is fanciful and relies on the wacky conceit that we all have packages sitting around the house that we'd like to mark with a personal identifier logo and send without even knowing where it's going to be sent, how much it'll cost to send it, when it'll get there. The design centers on this wooden laser device that is 0.000001% of the system, and I'll bet the vast majority of the work went into making the touchy-feely acoustic guitar paying videos tha
yeah let's do that (Score:2)
Let's create a brand new type of stamp and launch a taxpayer-funded initiative to upgrade every sorting machines. It'll only take a gazillion dollars, not be completed in any reasonable amount of time, and eventually abandoned.
Re: (Score:2)
Good thing no-one could hack or clone your toll transponder or clipper card, right?
http://www.technologyreview.co... [technologyreview.com]
http://www.sfweekly.com/2012-0... [sfweekly.com]
http://www.akit.org/2012/02/ha... [akit.org]
For your proposal, how to do prevent someone from photocopying the "something on a letter or package which identifies me"? For my counterproposal, I suggested (above) that you scribble something unique and take a picture of it (uploading the picture using your account credentials as identification of the package), producing a on
Simpler? (Score:2)
Currently to send a letter I:
1. Put a stamp on the corner.
2. Write down the address where I want it to go.
3. (Optional) put one of my return address labels on it.
Their method
1. Have one of their laser burners put a 'stamp' on the envelope.
2. Pull up an app and scan my 'stamp'
3. Tell it where to go (either through my contacts or by manually inputting it).
I don't see how this is 'simpler'...
Non-Issue (Score:2)
We don't need another 'stamp' (alreadying being done multiple ways) but the fears in this /. article are also unfounded and based on a lack of understanding of how the US Postal System operates. The stamp gets read at the start. Once it is into the system it is fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Already exists (Score:2)
The use case is sending a letter when you have a wifi connection is already handled. See: gmail.com for more info
Startup money must be cheap these days (Score:2)
There are four types of stamp uses and realizations mostly used in public. For adverts, they print a tag on the advert. For business letters with these little windows, they print it in the address field. For parcels you can print out a sheet and glue it in a parcel. And for the personal letter or postcard you mostly use lovely designed stamps. As I already have a printer, why shall I buy a device for stamps? And by the way I can even send an email to the post office and they will make a letter out of it inc
Dr. Evil's Delivery Service (Score:1)
Again a dumb idea (Score:1)