[cyberdrunk]

The State owns USPS and it's not so bad. Before phones were introduced, it was the main channel of communication.

[sneak]

The state currently performs suspicionless surveillance on the entire traffic graph of the USPS. Every piece of mail is weighed and imaged and sender anf recipient are placed into a database, so it is impossible to send a letter without creating a permanent record of source and destination.

You can, of course, leave off the return address, and this works fine for letter mail.

Packages, however, require ID to be dropped off. You cannot use the USPS to send packages anonymously.

The analogous version for a state-run ISP would be a blanket filter/ban on Tor/VPN usage.

I don’t think the USPS is a good example of a state-run organization for that reason. The state has already demonstrated their desire to eradicate personal privacy and anonymity.

[michaelt]

Some would take USPS as a demonstration of the state delivering a communication service with fair performance and competitive prices.

Others would take the USPS as proof that a strongman president can switch such services on and off at a whim, for political reasons.

[cyberdrunk]

> Others would take the USPS as proof that a strongman president can switch such services on and off at a whim, for political reasons.

When was it done?

[gumby]

This is why in most countries, phone systems were developed and run by the post office. I don’t think it worked out well.

I am supportive of municipal telecom infrastructure but this example always gives me pause.